INSIDE THE INCELOSPHERE: TRACING THE ORIGINS AND NAVIGATING THE CONTRADICTIONS
A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of
Special Case Master of Arts in Women’s and Gender Studies
By Lee Williams August, 2020
Copyright 2020: Lee Williams
UNIVERSITY OF REGINA
FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES AND RESEARCH
SUPERVISORY AND EXAMINING COMMITTEE
Lee Williams, candidate for the degree of Special Case Master of Arts in Women’s and Gender Studies, has presented a thesis titled, Inside the Incelosphere: Tracing the Origins and Navigating the Contradictions, in an oral examination held on July 27, 2020. The following committee members have found the thesis acceptable in form and content, and that the candidate demonstrated satisfactory knowledge of the subject material.
External Examiner: Dr. Murray Knuttila, Brock University
Co-Supervisor: Dr. A. Brenda Anderson, Department of Women’s & Gender Studies
Co-Supervisor: Dr. Dawn Flood, Department of History
Committee Member: Dr. Patricia Elliott, Department of Journalism
Chair of Defense: Dr. Marta Bashovski, Department of Politics & International Studies
*Not present at defense Williams i
Abstract
Incel, an online community of men connected through their shared lack of intimate relationships with women, is often described as a monolithic misogynist group of privileged and entitled white men. My research has revealed that, contrary to this dominant narrative, Incel is a racially diverse space and that this description overlooks the complexities and nuances that define this community. Incel is the product of both twenty-first century communication technology and the rhetoric of mid-twentieth century men’s movements. The Manbox, the foundation for Western hegemonic masculinity after the Second World War, is the form of masculinity that was both critiqued and embraced by these men’s movements, and now by Incel.
Central elements of Incel rhetoric, such as the de-politicizing of gender, the notion that manhood must be earned or achieved, and the belief that feminism created the lie of male privilege, mirror those of men’s liberationists and the MRM.
This study involved a qualitative analysis of the Incel forum Incels.Co. Discussion threads were reviewed and selected for further analysis over five-months. Data on the demographics of Incels.Co members, the use of pseudo-science and views on sexuality and race provided an essential framework to understand better the four central themes developed through this research. The four themes are: (1) Masculinities; (2) Views on Women; (3) Masculinity and
Violence; (4) Masculinity, Mental Health and Self Esteem.
These four themes are defined by contradiction and paradox. How hegemonic masculinity, the dominant form of masculinity in Western society, operates on Incels.Co is complex and even contradictory. Elements of hegemonic masculinity, such as heteronormativity, are strictly reinforced, while others, such as physical strength and financial success, become prominent copes, ways to, potentially, escape life as an incel. At the same time, there is a critique
Williams ii of the narrow standards of hegemonic masculinity, such as the expectation to remain stoic and emotionally repressed. There is a struggle to conform to these narrow standards and to deal with the consequences of failing to meet them, which data revealed to have a significant impact on the self-esteem and mental health of these men.
This study revealed that women are caught in a Madonna/Whore dichotomy in Incel discourse; having the ability to lift men out of inceldom, their bodies and their love is desired.
However, incels also view women as the cause of the problems they face; women’s hypergamy, feminism, and the biological urges that influence and drive women have created a society where incels cannot win. This narrative of Incel victimization is aided by the adoption of hybrid masculinities, which distance incels from male privilege (Ging 14). Women’s perceived violence against incels is used to justify violence against them, as to recognize women as victims would undermine the Incel narrative of victimization. Violence is a normalized aspect of the discourse on Incels.Co, through language and through the glorification of those comment acts of violence against women, used as a way to publicly perform and reclaim masculinity (Kimmel, Angry
White Men 179).
The findings of this study reveal that Incel is not a contemporary aberration of extremist views but rather is founded upon the rhetoric of twentieth-century men’s movements. Rather than a homogenous community with a common world view, Incel is a space of conflict, contradiction, and paradox. The Incelosphere’s misogyny and dehumanization of women represent the negative impacts of patriarchal Western society, amplified through the echo chamber effect. Incel also presents a valid critique of the narrow ideal men are expected to meet in order to be ‘a man’ and the detrimental effects this can have.
Williams iii
Acknowledgments
I am indebted to my co-supervisors, Dr. Brenda Anderson, and Dr. Dawn Flood. Their expertise in gender and history helped me lay a solid foundation for my analysis and guided me through the challenges and uncertainties of my research. Their continued guidance and support of my work, balanced with reminders of the importance of self-care, helped me successfully complete a challenging data collection and research process. I also wish to express my gratitude to my committee member, Dr. Patricia Elliott; her advice and suggestions helped strengthen my work and aided me to accurately and effectively convey the findings of my research.
I gratefully acknowledge the University of Regina for funding through teaching assistantships and the UR Graduate Scholarship, as well as the Faculty of Graduate Studies and
Research for funding through a Master Graduate Teaching Assistantship. In addition, I wish to acknowledgement the Government of Saskatchewan for funding through the Saskatchewan
Innovation & Excellence Scholarship.
I wish to acknowledge the support of my family and friends through my university career. They have helped me stay grounded, provided support and a space to step back when research became challenging. I would also like to extend a sincere thank you to my office neighbour across the hall. Her genuine care and acts of kindness truly made some difficult days of research so much better.
Williams iv
Post Defence Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge Dr. Murray Knuttila, who graciously agreed to be my external examiner. His questions gave me an important opportunity to reflect on my work and where I would like to take this research. His knowledge and feedback have helped me refine my thesis and have proven to be invaluable. I would also like to thank Dr. Marta Bashovski, the examining committee chair, for her time and work organizing this virtual defence.
Table of Contents Abstract ...... i Acknowledgments...... iii Post Defence Acknowledgements ...... iv Chapter 1: Introduction ...... 1 Chapter 2: Methodology ...... 6 Chapter 3: Historical Analysis ...... 15 Early Twentieth Century ...... 15 Post Second World War ...... 16 Men’s Liberation ...... 18 Divisions and the Men’s Rights Movement...... 23 Chapter 4: Contemporary Online Men’s Movements & Masculinities ...... 29 Masculinities: Power and Fear, Privilege and Pain ...... 33 Chapter 5: The Incelosphere ...... 38 Chapter 6: Data Analysis ...... 50 Demographics ...... 52 (Pseudo)Science in the Incelosphere and Defining Theories ...... 54 Sexualities ...... 59 Race ...... 64 Masculinities in the Incelosphere: Navigating the Contradictions ...... 69 The Madonna and the Whore: Incel’s Views of Women ...... 77 Masculinity and Violence in the Incelosphere ...... 83 Masculinity, Mental Health and Self Esteem...... 91 Chapter 7: Conclusion...... 97 Glossary ...... 105 Bibliography ...... 107
Williams 1
Chapter 1: Introduction
The term Incel, once relatively unknown to society at large, was catapulted into Canadian and international headlines after April 23, 2018, when a twenty-five-year-old man turned a rented van into a weapon as he drove it down Yonge Street in Toronto. The attack that killed ten people and left another sixteen injured initially seemed indiscriminate. In an interview with police following his arrest1, the driver, Alek Minassian, revealed he was directly targeting women. Just before the Toronto Van Attack, the perpetrator publicly posted this ominous message on his
Facebook profile2:
Private (Recruit) Minassian Infantry 00010, wishing to speak to Sgt 4chan please.
C23249161. The Incel Rebellion has already begun! We will overthrow all the Chads and
Staceys! All hail the Supreme Gentlemen Elliot Rodger!
The “Supreme Gentlemen” Elliot Rodger referred to in this post was a twenty-two-year-old man who styled himself as the “supreme gentleman” in a video he recorded just before carrying out his attack on May 23, 2014, in Isla Vista, California. The attack left six people dead and fourteen injured, ending with Rodger’s death by suicide. His primary target was the Alpha Phi sorority house and the women inside3. In both these cases, the perpetrators self-identified as incels4, short
1 The attack ended when a drink of someone on the sidewalk hit the windshield. Minassian was concerned about crashing the van due to the reduced visibility and, feeling his plan had been “foiled,” stopped driving. A standoff with a police officer ensued and Minassian repeatedly pulled his wallet from his pocket and pointed it at the officer. He later admitted in the police interview following his arrest that this was attempted suicide by cop (Thomas 158- 160). 2 Initially there was uncertainty as whether this account was real and/or belonged to the perpetrator. The following week Facebook Canada confirmed that the account was indeed registered to Minassian (Swain “Navigating a cryptic post”). This fact is still disputed by some within the Incel community. 3 Rodger attempted to enter the Alpha Phi sorority house but was unable to. Instead he targeted a group of women nearby. In the account of one survivor he was “smiling” and “smirking” as he shot her and her friends (Serna et al.). He then began shooting at pedestrians in the surrounding areas. 4 “Incel” refers to the online community, while “incel” or “incels” refers to individuals who are part of said community. Williams 2 for involuntarily celibate, and both stated that their actions were a direct result of their experiences of being romantically and sexually rejected by women. Perhaps most concerning was that Rodger appeared to be a source of inspiration for Minassian5 and potentially for others.
In the months following the Toronto Van Attack, the Incel community and incels became a topic of intense discussion in news and social media – could this happen again? What sort of threat do they pose? What kind of individuals are drawn to this online community? The narrative that first emerged of Incel being a community of predominately white men who are angry and feel entitled to women, bolstered by this act of violence, remains dominant. By April 2019, the first anniversary of the Toronto Van Attack, the perpetrator and the intense discussions around Incel had already started to fade from public discourse. In recent years there has been greater recognition of the irresponsibility of fixating on the perpetrators of such crimes in news media, as it not only gives them infamy and recognition but has the potential to inspire others to commit similar crimes. While this remains true, the effects and impacts of the Incel community cannot be overlooked and require critical and feminist analysis.
Much of the discussion and analysis of Incel has focused on violent misogyny and the manosphere – a homosocial online space comprised of informal websites, forums, and blogs where men can discuss issues relating to men or masculinity. Some of the issues brought up within the manosphere are based on facts, such as the limiting nature of masculine gender roles and constraining expectations for the performance of Western masculinity. Many, though, are based more on an emotional response rather than facts. It is important to note that feelings are real and how these men feel is real; however, these feelings may not be true, meaning that they
5 On September 27, 2019, the police interview conducted immediately after the attacks was made available to the media. In this interview Minassian confirmed that he started to “feel radicalized” after the 2014 Isla Vista attacks (Thomas 116).
Williams 3 are based on individual perception rather than facts (Kimmel, Angry White Men x). These are men who say they feel marginalized from society, which, in their perspective, is as a sexual marketplace that values physical appearance and monetary wealth above all else. Because the men of Incel feel that they cannot compete in these areas, particularly with regard to physical appearance, they are less likely to be successful in this sexual marketplace. They see themselves as the victims of a disruption of the ‘natural social order’, one initiated by Second Wave
Feminism and the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s. This was a time when women began to assert more autonomy in everything, from entering the paid workforce to the relationships they did or did not maintain. For many incels, women’s autonomy, free from patriarchal authority, has created a society where men’s struggles go unnoticed and where an increasing number of men are involuntarily celibate.
Reports on Incel often classify it as part of the alt-right, a movement that is defined primarily by its white nationalist and white supremacist views. There is a factual basis for this, as the origins of Incel lie in the alt-right corners of Reddit and 4Chan. Common Incel terminology, such as femoid and key theories like women’s hypergamy6, have their roots in the alt-right
(Sonnad and Squirrell). Even the primary ideological foundation for Incel, the Black Pill, described later in this thesis, is connected to the alt-right (Sonnad and Squirrell). Widespread anti-Semitism within Incel can also be linked back to roots in the alt-right. Despite these overlaps, there are two key differences – who is the focus of these movements and why do they join – that differentiate Incel as a unique community rather than simply an extension of the alt-
6 Coined by English anthropologists in India in the 1880s, hypergamy is the practice is marrying above one’s social class or caste (“Hypergamy” Dictionary.com). The term has been co-opted by anti-feminist spaces such as the alt- right, manosphere and Incel, whose online participants argue that women practice hypergamy more than men. In this context the reasons for marrying or dating up is about higher social status but also physical attractiveness (“Hypergamy” Incel Wiki). Hypergamy is generally viewed as intrinsic to women’s nature.
Williams 4 right. The increasing anxieties about white masculinity in North America in the alt-right position this movement as one specifically for white men.
Because of its contemporary roots in the alt-right, similar claims are made about Incel; however, research has proven this claim to be false. Data collection and observation of Incels.Co has revealed a racially diverse membership. Jaki et al.’s analysis of Incels.Co and its membership7 support this finding. This diversity does not mean that Incel is free of white supremacy and racism. There is a racial hierarchy that positions whiteness as the ideal while also positioning white masculinity as under threat and marginalized, much like the alt-right. This racism and victim-playing white masculinity does receive pushback and is challenged by black men and men of colour on Incels.Co, distinguishing Incel from the alt-right. Furthermore, a close study of Incel comment threads reveals how shared political views are not central, and there are different interpretations of the dominant ideology, contrasting with the alt-right, which is designated as a politically far-right movement (Lyons 2). My research found that while some may have been looking for an anti-feminist space when they joined Incel, there are also many men who join Incel in search of a space of solidarity and support, trying to understand the expectations society has placed on them as men and their own seeming inability to meet them.
Violent misogyny and anti-feminist rhetoric have been portrayed as the defining aspects of Incel in news media, especially following the Toronto Van Attack. These aspects are very much present; however, there is a more nuanced base to this community as there are also Incel discussions on men’s mental health and self-esteem, and the struggles of trying to conform to narrow and constraining masculine stereotypes. These discussions rely on tools developed by
7 Jaki et al.’s research was conducted on the forum Incels.Me. This is the original name for Incels.Co.
Williams 5
Second Wave feminism to challenge and deconstruct gender roles, which tend to be absent from the more nationalist-oriented and politically focused alt-right movements.
These inherent contradictions challenge the assumption that Incel is a straight-forward expression of hegemonic male power, and that it is, indeed, much more complex than initially thought. Data indicates the presence of hybrid masculinities, which operate by creating distance with hegemonic masculinity - and privilege - and makes it easier for these men to adopt the identity of ‘victim’ (Bridges and Pascoe 246-247). Within these online spaces, men who identify as incels can have their aggrieved entitlement – a product of the gender privilege associated with hegemonic masculinity – validated, while simultaneously rejecting and striving to achieve core components of hegemonic masculinity. At the same time, Incel also serves as an example of the negative impacts that this narrow construction of masculinity can have on men. Data collected reveals a pattern of low self-esteem and an inability to fully express their emotions, leaving individuals with coping mechanisms and techniques that are destructive to themselves and others.
At first glance, Incel is an online community that fosters and reinforces misogyny, and where individuals can become radicalized to take their resentment and rage offline through acts of violence that specifically target women. However, the reality of Incel is far more complex; far from being a homogenous group, my research found contradictory and clashing views within this online world. The limits and constraints of a narrow construct of hegemonic masculinity are brought to the forefront, while also being reinforced. Women are both the source of salvation from inceldom and the cause of it: the idealized innocent virgin and the manipulative and sadistic non-humans who purposely inflict pain. Through the violent misogyny, the rage and the resentment that have defined society’s views of Incel, in the forums one can read genuine
Williams 6 expressions of sadness, loneliness, and grief from men who feel that they have failed to live up to the expectations laid for them. Incel is a space that embodies misogyny and the negative impacts of hegemonic masculinity on gender relations, but also the adverse effects hegemonic masculinity has on men.
Chapter 2: Methodology
My analysis begins with a historical overview of men’s movements in North America, the location and context of this research. The reason for this is that while Incel is a transnational community, its roots are located in Canada and the United States. This analysis starts with the men’s liberation movement that materialized in the 1960s, through to the contemporary men’s rights movement. The purpose of this historical overview is to identify how these movements have influenced discourse regarding masculinities, particularly hegemonic masculinity. This will aid in identifying a connection between this discourse and how masculinities are conceptualized and performed within Incel. I aim to position Incel not merely as a contemporary aberration, a product of our digital world, but as having its roots in the masculinist discourse that emerged from the men’s liberation movement.
This analysis will be conducted through the lens of feminist postmodernism, rejecting the essentialism that is at the core of much of the masculinities discourse related to my research. I aim to present the dominant views of the members of Incels.Co through this analysis, and while individual experiences (in the form of thread comments) will be included, the focus will remain on how these individual experiences relate to the dominant views of the group. Feminist post- structuralism, drawing on the works of Judith Butler and Michel Foucault, also serves as a crucial lens of analysis, as the performance of masculinity and the unique language of Incel
Williams 7 outlining power and disempowerment are defining elements of this online subculture. Because of the centrality of language and discourse within Incel, a Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis
(FCDA) is a necessary and crucial component to this analysis. As opposed to Critical Discourse
Theory, FCDA provides a critical feminist lens, one that examines the discursive production of power and dominance, and how discourse is used to sustain a gendered social order (Lazar
184,189). Finally, I seek to avoid viewing and portraying Incel as a homogenous group, instead, looking at the diversity of membership and opinions united under the identity of ‘incel’.
My methodology relies on a qualitative analysis of Incels.Co,8 a predominant Incel forum. I also use this approach to deconstruct the nature of the discourse of Incel and the ideologies and world views, both historic and contemporary, that shape it. A qualitative analysis is crucial to this research, as it highlights more individual experiences, in keeping with my claim that Incel is not a homogenous entity. For this qualitative analysis, one unit of analysis is one discussion thread, including the original post and all the subsequent comments. I manually analyzed discussion threads from Incels.Co that were posted in the Inceldom Discussion section between November 2017 and January 2020. I chose to begin my sampling on November 7th,
2017, the day that Incels.Co first appeared online. It is also the same day that Incel communities on Reddit, such as /r/incels, were banned from the site for violating policies regarding harassment and inciting violence. This ban was preceded by a quarantine, a process applied by
Reddit administrators to a Reddit community deemed to be extremely offensive or incite violence, which limits access to them. The quarantine and subsequent banning of Incel communities was part of a crackdown by Reddit on violent material, such as glorifying or
8 This forum originally began with the domain name Incels.Me. The domain name was then changed to Incels.Is due to reports of abuse made to the registry operator, who subsequently dropped the domain. During the early stages of this research the domain name changed again, from Incels.Is to Incels.Co. (“Incels.Co.” Incel Wiki)
Williams 8 advocating for violence. The first few weeks following the creation of this forum saw a significant amount of activity from former Reddit users, stating views and ideas that they may have felt they needed to censor in a more public domain such as Reddit.
I first became aware of the Incel community in April 2018, following the Toronto Van
Attack. As more details came out in the days following, it became clear that the perpetrator had intentionally targeted women, and people began to ask, who and what is Incel? The picture of
Incel that emerged was that of a community of (white) men whose misogyny and angry stemmed from feeling entitled to and being denied access to women’s bodies, thereby leaving them as involuntarily celibate. Having a background in gender studies and an interest in masculinities, I sought to find scholarly research on Incel, however, my attempts were fruitless. This lack of scholarly research became an influencing factor in my decision to pursue this research, as I felt that this was too important of an issue to remain without academic analysis. With Connell’s work on masculinities, specifically hegemonic masculinity, and Kimmel’s concept of aggrieved entitlement as the cornerstones of this study, I endeavoured to learn more about Incel.
As an individual who watched the news coverage of the Toronto Van Attack with shock and concern, and who has felt deeply unsettled by much of what I have read about Incel preceding my analysis, it would be disingenuous to say I approached this subject matter completely without bias. My initial hypotheses about Incel, prior to this in-depth analysis, were, in part, shaped by these biases. As a result, I found myself having to drastically re-direct my thinking and general approach to this analysis. My analysis was refocused with the realization that the data did not support the view that Incel is a homogenous entity. Rather, there are varying factions that hold both complimentary and contradictory views on masculinity, women and inceldom itself.
Williams 9
The primary challenge of this research is the lack of scholarly analysis on Incel. When I initially began to consider Incel as a potential research topic in May of 2018, my preliminary research found no scholarly articles on Incel. Using different terms such as “involuntarily celibate” and “incels” in combination with different journals failed to produce results. This continued to be the case for several more months. It was early 2019 when I first found journal articles that included research on Incel, in particular, the works of Ging and Jaki et al. These articles proved to be immensely valuable and served as part of the foundation for my research.
Throughout the research process, the lack of available scholarly sources on Incel continued to be a challenge.9 I instead relied on news media reports and articles, alongside my qualitative primary source research on Incel forums. The majority of my academic research has, therefore, been focused on men’s movements, masculinities and internet subcultures, and how these influence and shape Incel. This thesis stands as a project that is specific to the context of the formative theory on Incel communities in the West, specifically the United States and Canada, and as such, contributes to a new and growing body of critical feminist research on masculinities.
In this analysis, references to specific events that are potential or proven acts of violence by individuals who claim to be incels, a key example being Elliot Rodger and the Isla Vista attacks in 2014, are an indispensable element. However, as mentioned previously, it is irresponsible to remain fixated on the perpetrators. Recent public discourse has critiqued the intense focus on these perpetrators or accused perpetrators of violence, arguing it gives them the infamy they crave and spurs on others to commit similar acts. A recent example of the movement against this is New Zealand and the Christchurch mosque shooting on March 15th, 2019. The
9 More work on Incel became available in 2020, largely undergraduate and masters level papers. Many of these papers analyze the now defunct Incel Reddit forums.
Williams 10 shooter has been named by media, but no photos of him have been published, and a deliberate effort has been made to give him as little attention as possible. For the sake of research and clarity, the names of the perpetrators and alleged perpetrators are included when necessary; otherwise, they will be referred to as the Isla Vista shooter, for example, or simply as the perpetrator. I chose to do this in order to move away from focusing on named perpetrators, and instead direct the focus onto the commonalities they potentially share, and what this says about masculinities and gender relations in our contemporary society.
Ideology is an integral part of this analysis, and therefore it is important to accurately define the term. Simply, ideology is a set of beliefs and values held by an individual or group.
These beliefs and values act as a lens through which we, as individuals and groups, interpret and understand the world around us. In his film, The Perverts Guide to Ideology, Slavoj Žižek, philosopher and researcher at the Department of Philosophy of the University of Ljubljana, examines the concept of ideology from an individual perspective, describing it not as something that is imposed on us, but rather as “our spontaneous relation to our social world, how we perceive each meaning.” Within a group, ideology can be used to maintain power relations and the status quo. Michelle Lazar, a professor of linguistics specializing in feminist discourse, describes ideologies as “group-based sociocognitive, representations of practices in the service of power.” (Lazar 186). It is these understandings of ideology that are used in this analysis.
In his work on ideology, Žižek draws attention to the concept of false consciousness.
Rooted in and still closely associated with Marxist theory, false consciousness is traditionally defined as the various processes (including ideological) through which certain groups are made to accept the inherent inequality and unfairness of the status quo. Michael Rosen’s broader definition describes false consciousness as, “simply consciousness that is, in some way or other,
Williams 11 deficient or inadequate” (2). It is Rosen’s broader definition of false consciousness that is applicable to this analysis, keeping in mind Žižek’s warning against the constructing of ideology simply as false consciousness; instead, ideology “is supported by ‘false consciousness’” (The
Sublime Object of Ideology 21). In the context of Incel and the Incelosphere, this is understood to mean that pseudo-scientific theories, social Darwinism and biological and psychological essentialism are not themselves ideology but are the false consciousness that supports the ideologies of the Incelsophere.
The concepts of hegemony and hegemonic masculinity are central to this analysis and require clarity of definition and application for risk of misinterpretation, especially for the latter.
The concept of hegemony stems from the work of Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Marxist philosopher and writer of sociology and linguistics. While much of Gramsci’s theorizing of hegemony is directly rooted in the political, David Forgarcs uses Gramsci’s work to describe hegemony as “[the] ‘cultural, moral and ideological’ leadership over allied and subordinate groups” (423). Hegemony, according to Gramsci, “will be exercised by a part of the social group over the entire group” (Selections from the Prison Notebooks 288). Gramsci’s work influenced
Australian sociologist R.W. Connell’s conceptualization of hegemonic masculinity. Connell defines hegemonic masculinity as “the configuration of gender practice which embodies the currently accepted answer to the problem of the legitimacy of patriarchy, which guarantees (or is taken to guarantee) the dominant position of men and the subordination of women”
(Masculinities 77). Further, it is the cultural exalting of one masculinity over others, one that
“embodies a ‘currently accepted’ strategy” of maintaining patriarchal social and power relations
(Connell, Masculinities 77).
Williams 12
Rather than representing the most common or normal construction of masculinity, hegemonic masculinity is positioned as normative, working “in part through the production of exemplars of masculinity (e.g., professional sports stars), symbols that have authority despite the fact that most men and boys do not fully live up to them” (Connell and Messerschmidt 846).
These models of hegemonic masculinity “express widespread ideals, fantasies, and desires… provide models of relations with women and solutions to problems of gender relations” (Connell and Messerschmidt 837). Connell asserts that through the patriarchal dividend “the advantage men in general gain from the overall subordination of women”, meaning that the majority of men, even those who do not or cannot perform hegemonic masculinity, still gain from hegemonic masculinity (Masculinities 79). Here is where the many complexities of hegemonic masculinity begin. Though a majority of men benefit from hegemonic masculinity, they are expected to define themselves in relation to a narrow and limited masculine ideal. Because hegemonic masculinity is disguised as realistic and normative, not meeting the standard is viewed as an even greater failure.
The promise of hegemonic masculinity is a guarantee of the “dominant position of men”, and when men feel that they are not in a dominant position and do not have the power they feel they should, aggrieved entitlement can take hold (Connell, Masculinities 77). Aggrieved entitlement, first coined by Michel Kimmel in his aptly titled book Angry White Men: American
Masculinity at the End of an Era, is the resentment of men who feel they have been denied access to something (or someone) that they are inherently entitled to by virtue of being men.
Although aggrieved entitlement is the by-product of privilege, and therefore the domain of white, cisgender, heterosexual men, there is an adamant rejection of the notion of having any privilege
Williams 13 at all and the adoption of a victim identity. It is rife within the Incelosphere, reinforcing a sense of victimhood and injustice.
In the case of aggrieved entitlement felt by a lack of access to women’s bodies, the roots are seeded in antiquity. Michel Foucault, French philosopher and social theorist, looks at the history of sexuality going back to the ancient Greeks, theorizing that there were “the ‘active actors’ in the drama of pleasures, and the ‘passive actors’…those who were the subjects of sexual activity (and who were expected to carry it out in a measured and opportune manner); and on the other, those who were the object-partners, the supporting players with whom it was carried out” (47). This divide was, of course, heavily gendered, with the first category representing, as Foucault specifies, “free adult men”, and the latter designating women as
“objects of possible pleasure”10 (47). Building on this notion of women as objects of possible pleasure, Foucault cites a Hippocratic text that describes sexual pleasure as where “the male plays the role of instigator and where he should always have the final victory” (128). This sexual divide of men being the active participants, the instigators and recipients of pleasure, while women are passive objects of pleasure, is one that continues in contemporary society and has helped fuel aggrieved entitlement. Women reclaiming power over their own bodies is by no means new, but it is a battle that continues, influenced by the intersectional oppressions women face. The enacting of rape shield laws, access to abortion rights, the criminalization of spousal rape, laws against sexual harassment in the workplace and the age of #MeToo and #TimesUp have all served as a direct challenge to the notion that women and women’s bodies can be used as objects of pleasure unchecked. For many men, including incels, this falls under what Malone
10 In this statement Foucault not only includes women but “boys [and] slaves” as “objects of possible pleasure” (47).
Williams 14 describes as “times of social upheaval” and the crisis tendencies that Connell describes take hold
(Malone 180; Connell, Masculinities 84).
Power and power relations play a vital role in the complex influence of hegemonic masculinity. In the text Chomsky vs. Foucault: A Debate on Human Nature Michel Foucault discusses power, describing it as:
only a certain type of relation between individuals. Such relations are specific, that is,
they have nothing to do with exchange, production, communication, even though they
combine with them. The characteristic feature of power is that some men can more or less
entirely determine other men’s conduct – but neither exhaustively or coercively. (210)
Hegemonic masculinity, then, operates on a larger scale not through direct action or force
(although violence can and is used, typically on a micro-level), but through the influence of men in positions of social, economic and political power, and tools such as humiliation and social shaming. This supports Connell's assertion that “It is the successful claim to authority, more than direct violence, that is the mark of hegemony (though violence often underpins or supports authority)” (Masculinities 77). Men who experience the privilege of race and class, then, may also experience the violence of hegemonic masculinity. Because of this, some men may feel as though they have no power and are, in fact, victims in a society that sees them as being privileged. This is compounded by the fact that while men benefit from hegemonic masculinity through the patriarchal dividend, those who “do not conform to stereotypical ideals of masculinity” can be systemically subjugated by hegemonic masculinity (Schmitz and Kazyak 3).
It is through this, Schmitz and Kazyak claim, that individual men can feel that they are powerless while “men as a collective group possess societal power and privilege” (3).
Williams 15
Chapter 3: Historical Analysis
When tracing the evolution of Incel, we find ourselves back in the 1960s – the decade that saw the emergence of Second Wave Feminism, the Sexual Revolution…and Men’s
Liberation. While Incel and Men’s Liberation appear to be completely unconnected, critical elements of the rhetoric produced by the Men’s Liberation movement, and other men’s movements that subsequently spawned in the 1980s and 1990s, are still prominent in contemporary discourse regarding masculinities, current men’s movements, and within Incel communities today.
Early Twentieth Century
Prior to the 1960s, men were generally less likely to be involved in gender-based movements; the strict reinforcement of ‘traditional’ gender roles following the Second World
War that reinforced hegemonic masculine authority by relegating women back to the private sphere, while men were to be the providers, and the head, of the family, had a role in this. Men returning from war could return to positions of power, if not in the capitalist marketplace, then at least in the home. These ‘traditional’ gender roles predate the Second World War, existing in some form or another for centuries in the Euro-West, evolving with society. Although these traditional roles were challenged regularly throughout the centuries, the events of the first half of the twentieth century set the stage for significant change. In the decades in between the First and
Second World Wars, Canadian women were recognized as persons under the law, some women11
11 In Canada and the United States, the vote was only extended to white and black women in the 1920s. The province of Québec was an exception; women’s suffrage did not pass until 1940. In the United States it was also extended to Native American women in 1924, however, laws in many states continued to restrict voting access for Native American women until the 1940s (Dunphy “The State of Native American Voting Rights”). In the 1940s Asian women gained the right to vote in North America. In Canada Indigenous women did not gain the right vote until 1958 (Inuit) and 1960 (First Nations), while the dates for Métis women are varied (Strong-Boag “Women’s Suffrage in Canada”).
Williams 16 in North America won the fight for the vote, a direct challenge to the male bastion of politics. In the 1930s, during the Great Depression, one out of five Canadians were reliant on government relief to get by; however, local governments generally refused aid to single, homeless men
(Struthers “The Great Depression in Canada.”). Instead, the federal government created unemployment relief camps where unemployed single men could work, though the pay was meagre and the conditions abysmal (Struthers “The Great Depression in Canada.”). The ability of both the single and the family man to successfully perform traditional masculinity through being an economic provider was greatly hindered by the Great Depression. By the end of the
1930s, and the beginning of the Second World War, enlisting in the military became an opportunity to further re-claim and re-establish a masculine identity, as many generations of men had done before.
Post Second World War
A generation of young men had their sense of gender identity, including their conceptualization of masculinity, shaped by the events of the Second World War. Part of being a good soldier was adhering to the core components of the dominant construction of masculinity – the stifling of emotions and fears, the ability to defend one’s comrades (and family back home), bravery. This hypermasculinity was brought home once the war had ended, even as many returning veterans struggled to maintain this façade of masculinity while dealing with the trauma of war. This had a significant impact on how masculinities were conceptualized and performed in North America; having had their masculinity defined by the homosocial and hypermasculine environment of the military, a generation of men passed this conceptualization of masculinity on to their sons (Karner 66). It is the sons, Tracy Karner, a visual sociologist at the University of
Houston, asserts, who were “presented with an idealized nuclear family and separate spheres of
Williams 17 interaction and identity for men and women.” These narratives spurred on “the desire to achieve a comfortable and familiar masculine identity” (67).
Those sons, especially those in the United States,12 soon found themselves facing their own wars, namely Korea (1950-1953) and Vietnam (1954-1975). Being faced with these conflicts “made a whole generation of fathers look like liars and betrayers,” and, through their initiation into manhood, a generation of sons became victims (Lewis qtd. in Karner 63). Karner claims that the conflict in Vietnam symbolically represents “the end of traditional masculinity in
America” (63). This end of traditional masculinity became visible after more than a decade of war in Vietnam when a war-weary youth began to mobilize in protest of the war and the conscription of young American men.13 The men of the anti-war movement rejected the narrow constructs of masculinity and found emancipation from, perhaps unexpected, places – the feminist and gay liberation movements, which often overlapped with the anti-war movement.
The influence of the questions and challenges raised by Second Wave Feminism and the Gay
Liberation Movement created a space for men to explore and challenge their own gender identities and heteronormativity (Wood 82; Connell, “Masculinities in Recent World History”
598).
Not all men accepted Second Wave Feminism’s critiques and challenges to gender roles and norms. One such man, George Gilder, an American writer and investor, argued that men are biologically different from women, and therefore different gender roles are necessary. Gilder
12 Canada formally participated in the Korean War by sending troops and participated in both the Korean and Vietnam Wars by sending peacekeepers. Additionally, between 20,000 and 30,000 Canadians volunteered with the American armed forces to go to Vietnam. While the impacts are more direct and evident in the United States, these two wars certainly left an impact on Canadian society as well. 13 Between 20,000 and 30,000 American men fleeing conscription crossed into Canada during the Vietnam war, fueling the anti-war movement that was already present in Canada.
Williams 18 asserted that any movement that challenged this should be resisted (Clatterbaugh 883). However, there was also a significant number of men who embraced the critiques of the narrow roles that influenced their lives, growing into the men’s liberation movement. The men’s liberation movement was not merely an embracing of feminist critiques but was a response to the Second
Wave and “the growth of a feminist consciousness” (Baker and Bakker 547). The development of men’s liberation in North America, according to Baker and Bakker, was a response by “some middle class ‘liberal’14 men” and that “many men felt excluded by women's solidarity and cohesiveness” (547). This desire for solidarity and unity would become a reoccurring theme of subsequent men’s movements.
Men’s Liberation
The initial focus of what was known as the men’s liberation movement honed in on the narrow constraints of masculinity as imposed by sex roles. The concept of sex roles was developed in the 1940s by Margaret Mead, an American cultural anthropologist. Mead asserted that differences in anatomy and reproductive function between men and women, what she labelled “primary sex differences,” were the foundation of distinctive sex roles (Sanday 344).
These sex roles were rooted in the biological, with references to men’s “biologically given aggressive protectiveness or desire for individual bravery” (Mead qtd. in Sanday 344). These masculine and feminine traits came to constitute the whole of human experiences, reinforcing heteronormativity, and what would later be known as a gender binary (Delphy 412). Sex roles relegated women to the domestic sphere, while the proper role for men was as the breadwinner and as head of the household. Sex-role theory extended beyond wages and labour and into the
14 While no exact definition of liberal is provided by Baker and Bakker, in this context liberal can be understood to mean an individual who, at least nominally, supported social change and social movements, such as feminism and the civil rights movement.
Williams 19 realm of the psychological, dictating what characteristics and behaviours were masculine and feminine. Masculinity was cut off from emotional expression, a phenomenon not new to this time period, but one with which men’s liberationists strongly identified. The result was what men’s liberation considered to be a “blockage” of emotions (Robinson 134). These narrow gender constructs were the basis of sex-role theory, and the focus of much of the literature and discussions of the early men’s liberation movement. They called for an end to the narrow construction of traditional masculinity and advocated for an expanded definition of manhood
(Messner, Politics of Masculinities 37). Men’s liberationists recognized and condemned the sexism experienced by women, but also drew attention to what they considered to be the high cost of the male sex role, in terms of health, happiness and social expectations, arguing that the male sex role was literally “killing men” (Baker and Bakker 551).
From the beginning, however, this emphasis on sex-role theory as a means to understand masculinity, sex roles and gender relations, placed limitations on men’s liberation’s ability to explore and critique masculinities and cast the die for the men’s movements that followed
(Messner, Politics of Masculinities 38). The earliest literature on masculinity in the 1950s positioned it strictly as a psychological essence, which Connell asserts, removed masculinity from social structures and gender relations, and effectively removed the possibility of masculinity to be understood as socially constructed (“Masculinities in Recent World History”
599). The literature on masculinity that emerged with the men’s liberation movement in the
1970s was just as limited, a therapeutic tool for men with no mention of power or privilege
(Coltrane 41-42). This was also apparent within the men’s liberation movement’s use of sex-role theory, where analyses did not critique institutional structures, but instead were individualistic and psychological in nature (Messner, Politics of Masculinities 38). The perception of feminism
Williams 20 and women’s liberation by men’s liberationists as a personal growth program, as opposed to a social movement, and as a straight rejection of sex roles instead of a rejection of patriarchal dominance and oppression, contributed to this type of discourse (Robinson 130; Baker and
Bakker 557).
The language of sex-role theory also greatly influenced the men’s liberation movement, notably the concept of “reciprocal roles,” which were interpreted as “equally oppressive”
(Messner, Politics of Masculinities 38). This notion of being equally oppressed, argues Messner, resulted in “the concept of ‘oppression’ becoming depoliticized, and as a result of this, oppression comes to refer only to “a general condition faced by everyone in a sexist society”
(Politics of Masculinities 38). This perspective of “gender symmetry” effectively depoliticized the very political language of gender relations, equality and oppression, allowing men’s liberationists to explore and challenge traditional masculinity, without questioning their institutional privilege (Messner, Politics of Masculinities 41). There was also the emergence of the victim complex that is present in contemporary men’s movements, as Baker and Bakker note that the ideology of the men’s liberation movement “claims that the traditional male sex role has placed great restrictions on men's behaviour, and actually grants them fewer choices in their lifestyle than women's experience” (547).
An additional limitation identified by Messner is the false universalization of men and men’s experiences by men’s liberation (Politics of Masculinities 40). Men’s liberationists, argues
Sally Robinson, represent “white, middle-class heterosexual men,” a tendency that Dwight Fee notes in his critique of the men’s movement, stating that the men these movements seem to attract are “privileged, young, heterosexual, white” (Robinson 130; Fee 174-175). Their experiences are used as the basis for a universal men’s experience. In the case of gay men, men’s
Williams 21 liberation recognized the existence of homophobia, however, the experiences of gay men were rarely included in liberationist discourse on masculinity, reflecting the dismissive attitude of men’s liberation towards women’s oppression and the defence of gender symmetry (Messner,
Politics of Masculinities 40). These key features, constructing masculinity based on biological and psychological essentialism, depoliticizing oppression through the concept of gender symmetry, universalization, and the removal of masculinity from the discourse on power structures, continued to be pervasive within many of the anti-feminist men’s movements that stemmed from the men’s liberation movement and in contemporary discussions on masculinities.
The work of Warren Farrell is a primary example of the limitations that result from this discourse on masculinity. A prominent figure within the men’s liberation movement, Farrell is viewed as the ‘father of the men’s movement’ during this time. Farrell saw traditional masculinity as a “straitjacket” for men and focused heavily on men’s ability to express emotion.
He claimed that men were “emotionally constipated,” and that this psychological harm was the cause of bodily harm, in the form of physical ailments such as ulcers (qtd in Robinson 132). Men also faced limiting and demeaning gendered objectification, Farrell argued. In response to feminist criticisms on the deleterious effects being considered a “sex object” has on women,
Farrell posited the construct of the male “success object” to be just as damaging (qtd in Messner,
Politics of Masculinities 39). Farrell’s views highlight some valid issues faced by men, such as the suppression of emotions and the pressures of achieving economic success, while also displaying the inability, or unwillingness, of men’s liberation to conceptualize masculinity and gender relations in a social context that acknowledges power, privilege, and the intersectionality of oppression. In an analysis of white men in men’s liberation, Robinson posits the reasons for this:
Williams 22
Lacking social grounding for a collective and politicized call for rights, white men in
post-1968 American culture enthusiastically begin to elaborate wrongs, constructing
narratives about individualized psychological and bodily wounds. (131)
These individualized narratives stem from the emphasis on individualism in North American culture, especially for white, heterosexual, cisgender men: they had limited experience with systemic oppression compared with those who are marked as the Other (women, Black people and people of colour, for example). Additionally, the capitalist society of North America, with its libertarian tendencies, emphasizes the success of the individual based on their own qualities and merit, not as collectives. The men’s liberation movement “substituted the personal for the political,” a fundamental problem for those involved with a movement whose ability to meaningfully grow was stunted by removing gender relations from the social context (Robinson
131).
The substituting of the personal for the political was a problem that would continue to plague the men’s movements to come, its impacts still visible today. The emotions and emotional expression of men was a central focus of the men’s liberation movement, one that bell hooks, professor and feminist social activist, argues Second-Wave feminists rejected in subconscious support of hegemonic masculinity and a patriarchal society. Hegemonic masculinity and patriarchy require adherence to a very narrow masculine construct, one in which emotions must be suppressed, with the only emotion for men deemed to have any value being anger (hooks
60,66). Through the men’s liberation movement, many men were embracing and reflecting on their own emotions, often for the first time, and wanted to change. In feminist circles, hooks states, this emotional exploration was not often welcome, as these men were “often labelled narcissistic or needy…attention seekers, patriarchal manipulators trying to steal the stage with
Williams 23 their drama” (7). This perception of men taking over the feminist movement with their emotions was not the only reason for feminists’ rejection of such men, hooks argues. Many women were still committed to the narrow constructs of hegemonic masculinity, in which emotional expression is weak and unwelcome, a commitment that continued to support a patriarchal society.
There is validity to both the critiques made by Second-Wave feminists at that time and the most contemporary critiques of hooks. Patriarchy, as hooks affirms, is not just upheld and maintained by men; women can and do work to maintain patriarchy as well. At the same time, the substituting of the personal for the political without the recognition that, for women and many other marginalized groups, the personal will always be political was problematic to
Second-Wave feminists and continues to be problematic today. While scholars today, such as
Jackson Katz, draw attention to hegemonic masculinity and emotional expression, they use a feminist lens. No such lens was used by the men’s liberationists as they continued their depoliticized emotional exploration.
Divisions and the Men’s Rights Movement
Moving into the 1970s and 1980s, through the influence of Second-Wave Feminism, the literature on masculinity began to include the socially constructed nature of gender, returning masculinity to the social realm. However, discussions of power and privilege continued to be absent from such literature; instead, these works continued to be more therapeutic in nature, focusing on the individual experiences of men and their emotional wellbeing, especially the development of sensitivity (Coltrane 56). The emphasis on the ability to express emotion came into conflict with the feminized nature of emotions (feminized through sex-role theory, the very thing they claimed to challenge). The use of aggressive terminology to describes men’s
Williams 24 emotional expressions was employed as a tool to reduce the potential risk of feminization. This terminology often made references to natural events associated with destruction and force, such as a “hurricane”, “volcano,” or “eruption” (Robinson 132). Much like a pop bottle exploding after being shaken too much, the potential for emotional expression with explosive force is highlighted through the metaphors of these violent natural events.
This time period also saw increasing divisions between men’s liberationists and their feminist counterparts, and within the men’s liberation movement itself. The substitution of the personal for the political reached a boiling point when Second-Wave feminists shifted their critique from sex roles, ideological constructs that men also felt impacted by, to the actual behaviours of men, such as domestic violence and rape (Robinson 131; Kimmel, Angry White
Men 104). At this point, it became too “personal” for the men’s liberationists, who could not make an argument for equal oppression regarding interpersonal violence and thus had their patriarchal authority challenged (Kimmel, Angry White Men 104). This challenge resulted in a split, whereby the men’s liberation movement continued with a mode of analysis that focused on roles and institutions that were oppressive to men, such as the military. This emotional and psychological focus left no room for the inclusion of power and privilege in these analyses
(Kimmel, Angry White Men 110).
By the late 1980s and 1990s, the men’s liberation movement had become the men’s movement, a taxonomy for a variety of diverse men’s movements. While pro-feminist men’s movements continued to support and espouse gender equality, the anti-feminist and masculinist sects developed into some of the most prominent movements of the time. One of these movements is the Men’s Rights Movement (MRM), which has outlasted many other movements of the period and continues to be active and influential today. The MRM consists of a series of
Williams 25 sub-groups and individual men’s rights activists (MRAs). The original MRM that stemmed from the men’s liberation movement in the 1970s was connected to anti-feminism, and, a decade later, masculinism, which focuses on the place of heterosexual, white men in Western societies (Wood
90). It is men, not women, the MRM contends, who suffer from gender discrimination, as well as being negatively impacted by feminism. The MRM dismisses the concept of patriarchy, pointing to the negative impacts it has on men to ‘prove’ patriarchy’s non-existence (Clatterbaugh 888).
Masculinism adheres to evolutionist psychology, which dictates that as a result of a need to adapt in prehistoric times, men and women have different, complementary roles and attitudes, and feminism has upset this balance (Wood 90). The presence of this thinking in the rhetoric of the
MRM is evident, as supporters claim feminism to be a plot to cover up women’s power, and that male privilege is a lie created by feminists (Messner, Politics of Masculinities 43; Clatterbaugh
888). Men, they claim, are the true victims of prostitution, sexist media constructions, domestic violence, and dating rituals, to name a few examples (Messner, Politics of Masculinities 42).
There is no desire to change or dismantle traditional masculinity, but instead, they assert that society should defend traditional masculinity.
While a split within the MRMs is evident, there remain apparent commonalities. The first is an understanding of gender and gender relations that is rooted in psychological and biological essentialism. Robinson describes the effects of this approach:
The biologistic slant of men’s liberation discourse, echoed by popular sexologies intent
upon negotiating the feminist challenges to a particular construction of male
heterosexuality, has the effect of naturalizing a set of social relations and a narrowly
conceived construction of the male body and the male psyche. (154)
Williams 26
This propensity towards the psychological and biological essentialism of gender and gender relations effectively discounts the social reality of male power and privilege. Darwinian concepts of biological imperatives are used to naturalize and, therefore, depoliticize parts of the heterosexual male construct (Robinson 154). A misinterpreted Freudian theory of repression, where painful memories or feelings are unconsciously dismissed, is employed to a similar effect
(Robinson 163). Men are considered to be subject to the laws of nature and are associated with nature, a theory that contradicts many feminist theories, which assert that women are associated with nature in a patriarchal society.15 Robinson states that this use of nature “makes it possible to override the political critique of normative male heterosexuality and to argue that men must reclaim their “rights” in the sexual realm” (156). As men’s movements shifted from critical analysis of the male sex role to celebrating, and later, in their perspective, defending, ‘traditional’ masculinity, biological essentialism became the basis for much of their ideology. In doing so, they returned to the arguments of George Gilder, which had been rejected only a few years prior.
Gilder’s assertions on the essential biological differences between women and men, which supported the concept of ‘traditional’ masculinity and biological essentialism, were now embraced by men’s movements.
The alleged overall negative influence of feminism is another commonality shared by the men’s liberation movement and MRAs, in part driven by this focus on psychological and biological essentialism. Messner states that even at the beginning, many approached the men’s liberation movement with “critical skepticism,” noting men’s liberationists’ failure to recognize the political context of oppression, as well as the view that men were “manipulated” by women
(“The Limits of ‘The Male Sex Role’” 264). Carol Hanisch, known for popularizing the phrase
15 This is due to women’s connection with reproduction and men’s connection to the rational mind.
Williams 27
“the personal is political,” warned of an “anti-woman, anti-women’s liberation” tendency within the men’s liberation itself (Messner, “The Limits of ‘The Male Sex Role’” 264). Hanisch noted similar concerns with the men’s liberation movement’s views of women as “henpecking their men into subservience” (qtd. in Messner, “The Limits of ‘The Male Sex Role’” 254). Her warning has indeed become a reality, as the anti-feminism that stemmed from men’s liberation has spawned into an ever-present anti-feminist sect of the men’s movement with its continued propagation of anti-feminist rhetoric.
What happened to the hope that came with the early men’s liberation? Along with gender symmetry, their focus on the psychological is partly to blame. Robinson states that “Because of the psychologized, therapeutic solution favoured by the men’s liberationists, this new construction of masculinity ultimately works to reinforce, rather than contest, male dominance”
(139). The MRM, which Michael Kimmel, a sociologist specializing in gender studies, describes as having been “planted in the same soil from which feminism sprouted,” decried feminism as a
“hateful ideology” and “an attack on masculinity itself” (Angry White Men 103, 108; Baber qtd. in Kimmel, Angry White Men 110). Feminism, they argue, is, in reality, a plot to cover up the fact that women have power and men are oppressed (Messner, Politics of Masculinities 41).
When it comes to gendered violence, it is women, many MRAs will assert, who are enacting this violence on men, with their physical appearance and manner of dress (Kimmel, Angry White
Men 118). Paul Elam, the editor of Men’s News Daily, an MRM website, claims that,
There are women, and plenty of them, for which [sic] a solid ass kicking would be the
least they deserve[…]The real question is whether men deserve to be able to physically
defend themselves from assault[…]from a woman. (qtd. in Kimmel, Angry White Men
118)
Williams 28
This manner of thinking not only undermines the very real and severe problem of violence against women but also returns to the psychological and biological essentialism that is at the core of the MRM. According to George Gilder, men are “beasts” and “barbarians,” driven not by rational thought but by biology and sexual lust16 – it is women’s job to transform them with love
(Thornhill and Palmer 261). The influence of feminism and the subsequent increase in women leaving the home to enter the paid labour force are viewed as a disruption to this natural order
(Thornhill and Palmer 260; Blais and Dupuis-Déri 25). The blame for men’s actions is placed squarely on the shoulders of women, holding them accountable for men’s behaviour and violence, de-politicizing it and framing it as a matter of biology. It is men, claims the MRM, who are the victims – of their biology, sex roles, and women and feminism.
In these movements, we see the beginnings of what we will come to know as Incel, through the focus on psychological and biological essentialism, but also in, predominately, the victimization of (certain) men at the hands of women and feminism, as well as unchecked misogyny. An example of this is in an interview with a twenty-three-year-old male subject17 on the topic of sexual violence. He viewed physically attractive women as “snobby,” believing that women only acknowledging men with high-powered jobs, who are assumed to have more sexual access to women in general (Beneke 375). The subject states to Beneke that “they’re [women are] snobby and they condescend me, and I resent it” (qtd. in Beneke 375). Feelings of degradation, dehumanization, and humiliation perceived to be inflicted by attractive women, viewed as having power over men, are also noted. This male subject saw himself to be the
16 This is one of the many contradictions that dominant masculinities discourse – men are linked with the rational mind, but at the same time are beasts driven by biology and sexual lust. 17 This subject did not identify as an incel and was not connected with Incel. This interview is included because of the similarities to comments made on Incels.Co, indicating the presence of these world views outside the Incelosphere.
Williams 29 victim of not only women, but of a capitalist system in which men who are more financially successful are more sexual access to women. This victim-playing and aggrieved entitlement are not new; however, data analyzed during this study suggest that through the echo chamber effect in online communities, they are amplified and reinforced.
Chapter 4: Contemporary Online Men’s Movements & Masculinities
The twenty-first century has seen a resurgence of the MRM. In 2013, Canadian universities noted a trend of “misogynist men’s rights groups on campuses and in communities across the country” (Allan 23). Sandy Hudson, an academic and co-host of the Canadian political podcast Sandy and Nora, also noted this trend as early as 2012 when she was with the University of Toronto’s Student Union. She received significant backlash after women on campus organized against the men’s rights associations that were popping up on campus, and whose members were, for the most part, not even students at the University of Toronto. Hudson has been threatened with doxing18 by Paul Elam even though he resides in Texas, highlighting the transnational nature of the MRM. Hudson also notes that most of these threats were directed at Black women,
Indigenous women, and women of colour and that the threat of these online movements moving to the real world is only now being taken seriously (Hudson “Women of Colour Have Been
Warning Us”).
Part of this resurgence, as seen in Hudson’s experience, can be attributed to the advent of the Internet, and increasing accessibility to it has seen social interactions forever changed in both positive and negative ways. The internet, Kimmel claims, provides men with
18 Doxing is an internet-based practice that involves the researching and online publishing of private/identifying information about an individual.
Williams 30
a man cave, a politically incorrect locker room where you can say whatever you feel like
saying without having to back it up with something as inconvenient as evidence and still
hide behind a screen of anonymity. (Angry White Men 115)
One of these Internet man caves is known as the manosphere. Made popular by Ian Ironwood,19 the term manosphere refers to a “loose confederacy of interest groups,” or internet subcultures, which take the form of blogs, forums, and other online communities (Ging 2; Nagle 86). The primary focus of the manosphere is to centralize issues relating specifically to men and masculinity, though it is important to note that the manosphere and masculinities within this space are by no means homogenous. Nagle indicates that the term ‘manosphere’ has been broadly applied to a wide variety of groups,
from progressive men’s issues activists dealing with real neglect of male health, suicide
and unequal social services to the nastier corners of the Internet, filled with involuntary
celibacy-obsessed, hate-filled, resentment-fueled cultures of chilling levels of misogyny.
(86)
There are significant philosophical, ideological, and political differences between these online subcultures, and there is often hostility amongst the subcultures that make up the manosphere (Nagle 86-88). It is the anti-feminist part of the manosphere that is the focus of this thesis, where MRAs, among other likeminded groups and individuals, have found a space in which they can share and spread their views, all with the security provided by anonymity.
Looking at the development of anti-feminist online spaces, Nagle traces it back to the “obscure” feminist online spaces on sites such as Tumblr around the 2010s, and the increasing “anti-male
19 A pseudonym, Ironwood is the author of the self-published book titled The Manosphere: A New Hope for Masculinity (2013).
Williams 31 rhetoric” and “radical liberal gender politics” that emerged from these spaces into the mainstream (86). There are similarities to the men’s movement of the 1970s, which emerged as a backlash to the increasing feminist critiques of male behaviour; these anti-feminist online spaces appeared as a response to the mainstreaming of so-called anti-male rhetoric. This is not to suggest that feminism or women hold responsibility for the reactions and responses of men, but rather that these similarities suggest how these men’s movements are one type of response to perceived challenges to hegemonic masculine privilege and a patriarchal society.
The Internet represents a unique space for the performance of gender: it both challenges and reinforces traditional gender roles, especially when it comes to masculinities. The interpretation of the internet as a masculine space dates back to the 1950s with Ellen Van Oost’s metaphor of the brain. Van Oost asserts that the “brain and thinking have historically always been situated in the male domain,” resulting in the linking of the computer to masculine social symbols and “therefore gave the computer and the computer worker an intrinsic masculine gender label” (12-15). Within this gendered domain, Lori Kendell identifies a “particular style of masculinity,” one that requires:
aggressive displays of technical self-confidence and hands-on ability for success,
defining professional competence in hegemonically masculine terms and devaluing the
gender characteristics of women. (261)
Kendell draws on the work of Messerschmidt, arguing, “Masculinity is never a static or a finished product. Rather, men construct masculinities in specific social situations”
(Messerschmidt qtd. in Kendell 261). As technology changes and the internet has become the access point to new social spaces, it also becomes a unique space in which masculinities are constructed, deconstructed and reconstructed. Its uniqueness stems from the transnational nature
Williams 32 of the internet: the physical and geographical boundaries that once limited the influences on the construction of gender to a more local context have been rendered moot. The internet requires a more active role than television and print media, as well as the additional element of direct influence from peers. In these online spaces, as Kendell has noted, masculinity is defined along the lines of hegemonic masculinity. However, these spaces can also serve as a place for hegemonic masculinity to be challenged and deconstructed. One such example is the “Anti-Jock” movement. Here, a group of “self-described ‘marginalized youth’” reject the hegemonic masculine tenants of physical strength and athleticism through their rejection of hyper-masculine sports and jock cultures.
In the case of MRAs, the exclusion of women from their online communities creates a homosocial online community. Within these homosocial spaces, the performance of masculinity is both constructed and reconstructed, challenged and policed. Key to this cycle of construction and policing is the re-occurring notion that masculinity is not naturally occurring, unlike femininity; instead, masculinity is earned. This is one of the many contradictions that have come to dominant masculinities discourse; while one is born with traits and characteristics that are inherently male or female, masculinity and manhood must still be earned in the public sphere.
David D. Gilmore’s text, Manhood in the Making, asserts that in most patriarchal societies, masculinity must be achieved or won (Clatterbough 886). Even Mead’s early concept of sex roles recognizes the perilous nature of masculinity in society, as Sanday notes in an analysis of
Mead’s work, “Thus, men become but women only need to be” (345). It is easy to presume that within these homosocial online spaces, with men competing with one another to show who is the most sexually aggressive, the most powerful, that it is hegemonic masculinity that is performed
(Kimmel, Angry White Men 116). While there are elements of hegemonic masculinity present
Williams 33 within these online spaces, especially within the manosphere, the presence of these elements cannot be interpreted simply as the performance and subsequent reinforcement of hegemonic masculinity. Instead, the presence of elements of hegemonic masculinity signals new forms of online masculinities.
Masculinities: Power and Fear, Privilege and Pain
Masculinity is not, as Connell and Messerschmidt note, “a fixed entity embedded in the body or personality traits of individuals”; it is a social construct and series of social practices that vary based on location and are constructed and reconstructed over time (836). Hegemonic masculinity, too, is subject to change, as noted by Connell, who emphasizes the notion that hegemonic masculinity represents the “currently accepted strategy” that changes when necessary to maintain systems of patriarchal power (Masculinities 77). As Western society underwent fundamental shifts in the decades following the Second World War, Western masculinities and gender relations experienced fundamental shifts as well. In the early decades of the twentieth century, the Industrial model and the New man were dominant constructions of masculinity
(heavily influenced by socio-economic class) (Hoffert). After the Second World War, a new model of evolved industrial masculinity, also referred to as the “Manbox,” emerged (Smiler 44).
Originally outlined by psychologist Robert Brannon and Deborah S. David in 1976, four key tenants comprise the Manbox: “No sissy stuff, Be a big wheel, Be a sturdy oak, and Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead” (Smiler 44-45; Brannon qtd. in Kimmel, “Masculinity as
Homophobia” 125-126). These four tenants represent a rejection of any behaviours or traits deemed ‘feminine,’ to compete and strive for success and higher status, to function independently and without emotion, and to be aggressive and a risk-taker (Smiler 45). The performativity of gender is also strongly reinforced by the construct of the Manbox, as it acts as a
Williams 34
“mechanism for comparing or ranking men against each other based on how masculine they are”
(Smiler 46). The Manbox represents the foundation of the hegemonic forms of masculinity in the
West since the end of the Second World War.
The successful performance of masculinities is of paramount importance if one wants to identify as a man and not have their manhood questioned. Smiler notes that the more closely that the Manbox directives are adhered to and the more visibly they are performed, “the more likely he is to be seen as masculine…or ‘a real man’” (46). The concept of gender performativity informs Connell and Messerschmidt’s rejection of the conceptualization of masculinity that claims that masculinity is fixed on the male body. They argue that masculinities are, in fact, configurations of practice that are accomplished in social action, with the body as both an agent and an object of social practices. This claim follows with Kimmel’s definition of manhood as a performance for and judged by other men; there is then a fear of humiliation, potential emasculation and feminization by other men when performed incorrectly (“Masculinity as
Homophobia” 127-128). The fear of emasculation and feminization is intensified in the homosocial environment of the capitalist marketplace, which then requires extra vigilance regarding how manhood is performed (Kimmel, “Masculinity as Homophobia” 124). This assertion that homosocial environments requiring extra vigilance is not limited to the real-world, as this same practice is evident in online homosocial spaces such as chatrooms and forums.
Masculinities cannot be discussed without also discussing power and privilege. Michael
Kaufman states that, “in a world dominated by men, the world of men is, by definition, a world of power” (142). Baker and Bakker similarly identify a desire for power as an element of the
North American and British ‘traditional’ (read patriarchal) male sex role, marking power as intrinsic to Euro-Western masculinities. This link between power, privilege and masculinities
Williams 35 must not be construed as universalizing power and privilege with regard to masculinities.
Kimmel is highly critical of this, asserting that masculinity cannot and should not be conceptualized as merely a ‘drive for power’ (“Masculinity as Homophobia” 136). Coston and
Kimmel argue that the claim that “all men have privilege” negates the intersectionality of men’s lived experiences. Kaufman himself notes men’s contradictory experiences of power stem from
“the intersections of class, race, sexual orientation, ethnicity, age and other factors in the lives of men” (143). This power, Kaufman maintains, is tainted, leaving men with “a strange combination of power and powerlessness, privilege and pain” (142). He asserts that this pain is not the same and cannot be compared to women’s oppression under a patriarchal social order, nor can it be used as an excuse for enacting violence or oppression. This pain results in a fear of not being considered a man, and, as Kaufman states, in a society that often confuses gender and sex as being synonymous with one another, not being considered a man means not being considered male, again returning to the assumption that masculinity and manhood are directly connected to the body. This pain and fear contribute to a need to assert power over another group, as Kimmel connects the fear of emasculation and feminization explicitly with homophobia, sexism, and racism, even noting it is “the Other” against which hegemonic masculinity is constructed (“Masculinity as Homophobia” 124).
When power and privilege are threatened or challenged, regardless if this threat is real or imagined, what Connell refers to as “crisis tendencies” take hold20 (Masculinities 84). The crisis tendencies are apparent in power relations and relations of cathexis (Messner, Politics of
Masculinities 11). For instance, in their analysis of the 2008 recession and its impacts on
20 Connell uses this term as opposed to the phrase “crisis of masculinity,” arguing that masculinity itself is not in crisis.
Williams 36
Canadian masculinities, Grieg and Holloway claim that such crises tend to provoke a restoration of dominant masculinity. These crisis tendencies have seen the resurgence of ‘retro-manhood’ of the 1960s as an answer to that desire for ‘tradition’ and dominant masculinity, with its hyper- heterosexual, sexist and homophobic characteristics (Grieg and Holloway 131). Within the manosphere, these crisis tendencies are evident, as these men believe themselves to be the unjust victims of feminism and the sexual revolution and adopt a hyper-heterosexual, sexist, and homophobic rhetoric as a means to reassert dominance. However, there is a contradiction when one performs and reinforces hegemonic masculinity and yet continues to construe their status as that of a victim. The solution is the adoption of masculinities in which power, privilege, and the status of victim can exist simultaneously.
In her analysis of masculinities in the manosphere, Ging draws on the work of
Demetriou, who outlines the process by which elements of subordinate or marginalized masculinities that are deemed “strategically useful for continued domination” are adopted by hegemonic masculinity (5). These elements are “strategically woven together”, becoming a
“hybridity of patterns—in an ongoing process of negotiation, appropriation, and reformulation— function to secure external hegemony,” with the result being the creation of hybrid masculinities
(Ging 5). These hybrid masculinities, according to Bridges and Pascoe, operate in three key ways:
(i) [to] symbolically distance men from hegemonic masculinity; (ii) situate the
masculinities available to young, White, heterosexual men as somehow less
meaningful than masculinities associated with various marginalized and subordinated
Others; and (iii) fortify existing social and symbolic boundaries in ways that often
work to conceal systems of power and inequality in historically new ways. (246)
Williams 37
In a space like the manosphere, hybrid masculinities serve a key function, as they create distance with hegemonic masculinity, which has become synonymous with privilege. Creating distance with the notion of having privilege allows online participants to more easily adopt the identity of victim – of feminism, of civil rights, of multiculturalism – and validates their aggrieved entitlement.
Geek masculinity in the manosphere operates similarly to hybrid masculinities. Adrienne
Massanari notes that masculinity, specifically white masculinity, is an inherent component of geek and nerd culture and that it “both repudiates and reifies elements of hegemonic masculinity” (Connell and Messerschmidt qtd. in Massanari 332). While physicality and (hetero) sexual success associated with hegemonic masculinity are rejected, the perception of intellect as superior to emotional intelligence is embraced (Massanari 332). Through this repudiation and reification, much like the adoption strategy of hybrid masculinity, those who identify with geek masculinity are able to distance themselves from hegemonic masculinity, and the privilege that is intrinsic to it. As a result, despite being white men who “possess significant cultural capital,” they are unable, or unwilling, to recognize their privilege, instead interpreting themselves to be marginalized (Ging 5; Massanari 332). This distancing again allows from the adoption of a victim identity, and the validation of aggrieved entitlement.
In hybrid and geek masculinities, the long-term impacts of the men’s liberation movement and the MRM’s masculinities discourse are realized; the depoliticizing of gender relations removes the institutional privileges of specific masculinities from masculinities discourse. This has given room for the construction of masculinities that distance themselves from power and privilege, despite still benefitting from it, to flourish. This depoliticization is further aided by the embracing of biological essentialism, which is used to support the claim that
Williams 38 masculinity is directly connected to the male body, that men are driven by natural law and have
“rights in the sexual realm” (Robinson 156). Feminism and the Sexual Revolution disrupted the ability to exercise these ‘rights,’ and so a victim complex stems from these lost ‘rights.’ These hybrid and geek masculinities are present within the Incelosphere, where the concept of male privilege is considered a feminist lie. Women, specifically feminists, are blamed for incels’ lack of intimate relationships, and incels view themselves as the victims of both hegemonic masculinity and feminism.
Chapter 5: The Incelosphere
The exact origins of the contemporary Incel community are unclear, to say the very least.
The term “incel” is widely attributed to a woman named Alana, who created Alana's Involuntary
Celibacy Project (AICP). Originating in the 1990s, this online encouraged those who were unhappy with their current lack of intimate relationships, becoming an online space for support.
Alana’s original forum and other similar spaces were open to men and women, and being an incel was not considered a permanent state. Within a decade, a major shift occurred within the culture of this online community, and the Incelosphere became increasingly defined by its resentment of women, rampant misogyny, and the perceived permanent nature of being an incel.
Today, self-identified incels vehemently reject the notion that their community and its name, which has become an identity, stemmed from an online space created by a woman. They point to the fact that a man named Antoine Banier, who originally coined the term “invcel” as an abbreviation for involuntarily celibate.21
21 It is noted that Alana used this term and removed the ‘v’, therefore technically coining the term ‘incel’.
Williams 39
The Incelosphere, much like the manosphere, refers to a collective of online communities, in the form of blogs, vlogs, and forums. While differences can and do exist amongst these various online spaces, there are shared elements that mark these online communities as being part of the Incelosphere. One shared component is language and terminology: like many Internet subcultures, there are several distinct terms and phrases used within the Incelosphere. While some of these do overlap with the broader manosphere, these distinctions are important to note as language is a crucial component to understanding online communities such as Incel (Jaki et al. 25). In their analysis, Jaki et al., referencing the work of
Haythornthwaite, assert that “online communities emerge through language” and that “the use of a group-specific language determines the boundaries of the community” (25). The most often reoccurring terms are identified and allocated to one of three groups: (1) terms referring to the individual self (usually have the ending -cel); (2) terms for “targets” i.e. women and attractive men; (3) terms relating to Incel ideology (Jaki et al. 25). The language of Incel is too vast and intricate to analyze in its entirety in this analysis.22 For this research, I chose to include core terms that I believe are centrally defining aspects and characteristics of Incel.
The term ‘incel,’ at its core, is a portmanteau of ‘involuntarily’ and ‘celibate,’ implying that an individual who is an incel is not in any sexual and romantic relationship, and not by choice. However, there are differences with how that identity is understood within the
Incelosphere and on the outside. According to Rebecca Jennings’ Vox article, “Incels Categorize
Women by Personal Style and Attractiveness,”23 which focuses on basic Incel language, incels believe that they are simply owed sex by women and, therefore, they feel a sense of aggrieved
22 A glossary of common and key terms has been included for clarity and further insight. 23 Members of Incels.Co are generally very aware of any articles written about incels, such as the Vox article, and tend to adamantly reject the majority of what is written in these articles.
Williams 40 entitlement when denied this. This view of incels as misogynistic and entitled repeats in other articles and media coverage of Incel. Within the community, however, the term ‘incel’ is understood quite differently. The ‘Intro to Incels’ thread on Incels.Co states that
Incel means Involuntary Celibate, a person who wants to be in a loving relationship but is
unable to find a partner, even after trying dating applications or approaching in real life.
Note that sex is not the main point of being incel. (November 7, 2017)
From this perspective, what it means to be an incel is quite different – not someone consumed by aggrieved entitlement and misogyny, but someone who wants a “loving relationship” (not just a sexual one) but has failed to find this. Within the discussion threads, however, inconsistencies with this claim emerge. Many incels believe themselves to be an “oppressed group” and women as their primary “oppressors.” One man, in particular, even argues that “Incels are the only marginalized group that isn’t allowed to say, ‘Check your privilege’” (Leucosticte October 2,
2018). In a thread titled A message to “guests,” referring to anyone on the site who is not a member, a man with the screenname Purification argues, “We incels are an oppressed group. All of the oppression and suffering we received at the hands of women and society has caused incels to go insane, and ultimately, commit suicide” (April 25, 2018). He goes on to describe this
“oppression” as “a literal holocaust. A holocaust of tultumous [sic] proportions. A silent holocaust” (April 25, 2018). The use of the term “holocaust” here is striking, indicating not only a deep-seated feeling of injustice and rage, one targeted predominately at women, but also the disquieting manner in which violence and acts of violence are understood.
The terminology of Incel is linked to the shared world views of the Incelosphere, so it is essential to define this third category before going forward; however, this is not easily done.
There have been numerous debates between incels on the merits of competing ideologies such as
Williams 41 the Red Pill and Black Pill, challenging the idea that Incel is a group of men who blindly follow a universal worldview. Attempts by those outside the Incelosphere to identify a prevailing ideology, and ensuing rejection of the notion of a shared Incel ideology by those within the community, all tend to focus on political ideology, particularly that of the far and alt-right. What unites those within the Incelosphere is a gender ideology. Also known as gender role ideology, it involves the attitudes with regards to the proper roles and responsibilities of women and men in society (Philips). There is no one singular gender ideology, rather a wide range, from anti- feminist to egalitarian. The gender ideology present within the Incelosphere falls under the anti- feminist category, which justifies gender inequality and soundly rejects feminism.
A defining element of Incel, the Red Pill, is a driving force in this adherence to anti- feminist gender ideology. The reference comes from the 1999 film The Matrix, where the character Neo is offered a choice between a blue pill and a red pill. The first will essentially act as a pair of rose-coloured glasses, and Neo can live in ignorant bliss, believing what he wants.
The red pill acts as the opposite, opening Neo’s eyes to the harsh reality of human life after the artificial intelligence revolution. A product of anti-feminist reactionaries, the Red Pill has become not just a metaphor but an ideology, one that is present in the Incelosphere, as well as manosphere, the contemporary MRM and Men's Rights Activism (MRA). Originating in these online spaces in 2009, the purpose of the Red Pill is to “awaken men to feminism’s misandry and brainwashing” (Ging 3). While the Red Pill is meant to act as the “key concept that unites all of these communities,” this position as a uniting concept is challenged by the Black Pill, a nihilist ideology (Ging 3). In the Incelosphere the concept of having ‘taken the pill’ or being ‘red/black pilled’ is crucial to one’s identity as an incel, with the views of those who have not taken a pill yet or worse, are Blue Pilled, are viewed as biased and unenlightened. It is acknowledged that
Williams 42 there are Red and Black pilled individuals that operate outside the Incelosphere, whether they recognize it or not. Using the screenname Incelibate anarchist, one man argues that the Black Pill is popular outside the Incelosphere and that it is only rejected when it is “dropped” by an incel
(June 30, 2018). Another individual with the screenname doktordoom, agrees, claiming that “the blackpill is basically science being put into layman terms” and that “blackpills have been known to non-cucked24 scientists for years” (June 30, 2018).
There are several familiar elements in Red Pill’s discourse on masculinities and gender relations, such as the rejection of feminism and progressivism and the acceptance of biological essentialism and gender determinism, which are also present in MRM and MRA discourse
(Mountford 2). The influence of The Red Pill is pervasive, with a notable example being the emergence of an MRM sub-movement, simply referred to as The Red Pill (TRP), as well as by the spreading of “‘red pill’ nomenclature into seemingly unrelated corners of the manosphere”
(Van Valkenburgh 2; Mountford 1). It represents the negative impacts of what Mountford describes as the post-geographical connectedness brought about by the Internet and the numerous ways in which people in distant geographical locations can connect, and ideas can spread beyond borders. Mountford asserts that this ‘disruption of geography’ allows for an extreme minority to congregate in a way that would not be possible offline. As a result, the rhetoric that develops in these spaces grows increasingly more extreme, and the collective gender identity far more counter-cultural (Mountford 3).
24 Coming from ‘cuckold’, a term for a man with an adulterous wife, a cuck is a weak or beta man. For incels the term takes on a slightly different meaning, focusing less on the alleged weakness and flaws in the performance of masculinity. Instead, to be a cuck or be cucked means to be ignorant to women’s promiscuity and to how Western society has become influenced by women and feminism, making women’s lives easier.
Williams 43
The Red Pill prescribes a new form of masculinity that “is consciously constructed in reaction to feminist and societal shifts,” becoming part of the recurring theme of the development of reactionary masculinities and men’s movements (Mountford 2). Within the
Incelosphere, there is evidence that this prescription has indeed manifested, not necessarily as a new singular form of masculinity, as the Incelosphere is heterogeneous, but in how masculinity is performed. This performance adopts elements of geek masculinity, with the repudiation and reification of hegemonic masculinity and hybrid masculinities, with the distancing from privilege. It allows for both aggrieved entitlement and a victim identity to play a central part in this performance of masculinity.
While the Red Pill has been the foundation of Incel ideology, it has grown and evolved into something new: The Black Pill. SergeantIncel, the creator of Incels.Co, describes the Black
Pill, in great detail, as:
a pure and ongoing distillation of decades of sociological, biological, and psychological
research towards understanding the unvarnished, comprehensive truth of male-female
sexual and relationship dynamics[...] It is only concerned with truth – truth born out not
of opinion or belief, but of research and fact. (November 7, 2017)
This description by SergeantIncel goes into greater detail outlining precisely what the Black Pill entails, stating that it covers subjects such as:
- What personality traits are most associated with male sexual success. - The value of a man’s unchangeable characteristics (race, height, face) to a woman. - How modern changes in society and technology have vastly facilitated advanced female hypergamy (the tendency of women to want to “date up”) - Why growing numbers of men are being left behind – alone, isolated, depressed, and suicidal (November 7, 2017)
Williams 44
The Black Pill is a fatalist and nihilistic ideology, one that focuses specifically on gendered behaviour and physical appearance, but that ultimately asserts that life is hopeless. According to the Red Pill, through techniques such as gymcelling (attempting to achieve the best physique possible by working out) and betabuxxing (earning as much money as possible), an incel can potentially ascend and therefore escape inceldom. There is no way out in the Black Pill; incel status is permanent, and these aforementioned techniques are mere ‘copes.’ It is this key area where the tension between those who are “Red-Pilled” and those who are “Black Pilled” is most evident. To Black Pilled incels, the Red Pill is a step-down, not as advanced ideologically and its adherents not as intelligent. The Black Pill takes the biological essentialism that is inherent to the
Red Pill and amplifies it with pseudo-scientific theories ranging from gender and sexuality to genetics. These pseudo-scientific theories are used to support pre-existing notions about human interactions and society itself, relying on their so-called ‘scientific roots’ to provide legitimacy.
The Black Pill’s ideological focus on biological essentialism and genetics manifests itself most notably in discussions regarding the body and physical appearance. These discussions on looks include everything from the more commonplace topic of height to very specific qualities, such as wrist size. Physical appearance plays a key role in Incel and the world views of individual incels, a notion epitomized in the comment “Its [sic] all about looks and ONLY looks”
(December 5, 2017). It is looks, not personality, nor economic or social status, that is the key determinant for how successful a man will be in heterosexual relationships and life in general.
The value of physical appearance and attractiveness is emphasized by an individual using the screenname universallyabhorred, who writes, “People automatically and subconsciously degrade, shun harass and bully you if your face is below average” (May 12, 2018). Zyros takes this even further, stating, “The main problem with inceldom is that the [sic] your sexual worth
Williams 45
(aka. looks) is used to measure your value in EVERY AREA OF LIFE instead of what its intended to: just sex and relationships” (November 11, 2017). The reason for this, according to incels, is biological, arguing that there is an inherent social Darwinism that operates based on physical appearance:
Genetically inferior men throughout history have died sexless in droves. Nature seeks to
weed out the trash for the betterment of the species. Females are disgustingly primitive
and will never change, it is impossible for them to want sex with an incel[…]The future
for incels is bleak. Women will never change. Lookism is inherent and perpetual. Either
hide your subhumanity [sic] through invasive bone breaking plastic surgeries and hope to
fool a femoid, or life [sic] out your days sexless. (VileGeneticTrash November 8, 2017)
Contrary to the MRM and George Gilder, who argued that men were beasts driven by biology rather than rational thought, according to the Black Pill, men are driven by biology as well as rational thought. It is women who are the real “primitive beasts” and operate based on primal urges of finding an attractive mate, a ‘Chad.’ One individual argues that this is why women
“deserve no sexual freedom” (universallyabhorred November 8, 2017). The reason given is linked back to feminism and women’s rights, as an individual who goes by SchrodingersDick states that “On August 18, 192025, The first snowflake that would later form a snowball that is the collapse of the west and return to the dark ages was formed” (August 12, 2018). In this and other discussion threads, Western feminism, even pre-dating the Second Wave and the Sexual
Revolution of the 1960s, and women having been “given” their rights are consistently blamed for the problems facing the world today, from political to social.
25 On August 18th, 1920 women’s suffrage was ratified in the United States.
Williams 46
Incel is more than an online community with others who have similar experiences; for many, it is an identity, one that defines them and their world views. When it comes to identifying or descriptive terminology for themselves, the majority of the terms have to do with physical appearance/characteristics. The suffix ‘cel’ is a central part of the terminology of Incel – other identifiers are positioned as a prefix, such as ‘currycel,’ ‘ethnicel,’ ‘mentalcel’ and ‘gymcel.’ It acts as a link, connecting identifiers that would typically be unrelated under the larger identity of
Incel. Another example is the suffix ‘-let,’ commonly used as ‘manlet,’ refers to a man who considers himself to be short in terms of physical height, typically used in a self-deprecating manner. An individual with the screenname Welcumtotherealworld asserts, “It is truly over for manlets” (May 13, 2018). This statement is frequently repeated on Incels.Co, reflecting a common sentiment in the Incelopshere, that being the importance of height.
Gymcel is a term that refers to an incel who frequently works out in an attempt to improve his physical appearance with the goal being to improve his sexual marketplace value and command the respect of other men. Explaining his views in a thread titled Every incel should be gymcelling, an individual with the screenname VincentVanCope asserts, “You will probably continue to rot as an incel, but the change in power dynamics once you start lifting is legit. The appearance of being a meathead thug..is [sic] the great equaliser in this world” (April 21, 2019).
VincentVanCope goes on to say that this change in power dynamics “Makes life slightly less unbearable” (April 21, 2019). In essence, what VincentVanCope’s statements indicate is that by fulfilling a masculine stereotype of physical strength he, and other incels, will gain respect from other men, and society in general that they feel they currently do not receive.
The concept of ‘gymcelling’ is just one aspect of ‘looksmaxxing’ or attempting to improve one's physical appearance, ranging from basic hygiene to taking steroids to plastic
Williams 47 surgery. There is certainly no consensus as to the efficacy of any of these techniques; in a thread regarding thoughts on plastic surgery, one man discloses, “Yes my main hope in life of ascending from inceldom is plastic surgery. Saving up for it now, a nose job is what I need most”
(Lonelycel May 10, 2018). Another argued, “Surgery is a pipe dream, it only helps if you have 1 bad feature like a recessed chin or big nose” (hunchback May 10, 2018). Too much focus on improving physical appearance can be considered to be lookism26 or as a “cope.” The term cope refers to techniques and tactics individuals use to either deal with their inceldom or try to improve their chances of ‘ascending’ – successfully entering into a relationship with a woman.27
The concept of ascension and the notion of coping with one’s inceldom is a part of Red Pill ideology. In contrast, Black Pill ideology views the concept of ascension as a cope itself, and ultimately copes are weak, a way of not fully accepting the reality of inceldom.
Mentalcel, which itself is a broader term that encompasses identifiers such as depressioncel, body dysmorphiacel, autismcel, is a term that describes a person who came to be part of the Incelosphere due to some underlying mental illness or cognitive disorder. It reflects a larger issue of mental health within the Incelosphere. In one thread titled When was the last time you had suicidal thoughts?, eighteen out of the twenty-one respondents stated that they had suicidal thoughts daily. Terms such as “suicidemaxxing” and “hitting the rope,” both referring to suicide, are referenced as solutions to the loneliness, depression and hopelessness, as one man claims, “Suicidemaxxing is the only hope for us incels” (Marin November 10, 2017).
‘Subhuman’ is a term that incels frequently use to describe themselves, with thread titles such as
Looks ALWAYS Mattered. Women were ALWAYS Cruel to Incel Subhumans, linking their self-
26 Lookism is an extreme focus on physical appearance. There are separate lookism forums within the manosphere. 27 In order to be considered ascending the relationship must be sexual in nature, but it is unclear if it must also be romantic.
Williams 48 assigned status as subhumans to their physical appearance (Lestat November 15, 2017). In these terms regarding physical appearance and mental health, there is a recurring theme of low self- esteem, especially regarding physical appearance, throughout the Incelosphere.
There is another set of terms based on the categories of race and ethnicity – ethnical (an incel who is not white), currycel (an incel who is of South Asian ancestry), ricecel (an incel who is of East Asian ancestry), with Asian people mentioned more often, and Black and Arab people less often (Jaki et al. 20). While determining the socio-demographics of the Incelosphere is challenging, the presence of such terms and individuals using these terms to describe themselves supports the claim that this online space is by no means the exclusive space of white men. Nor, however, is it a space of racial equality: Jaki et al. observe that the racism in this online space is
“sporadic rather than systematic” (19). This pattern of racism was also observed in my research; even with pushback, these terms continue to be used in a degrading manner,28 with racist comments such as ‘go back where you came from.’
Looking at Jaki et al.’s second category of terms for women and men who are not incels, a category defined by heteronormativity, the two terms the most well-known outside of the
Incelosphere are ‘Chad’ and ‘Stacey.’ Chads are described as conventionally attractive men, muscular and popular, and are believed to have sexual relationships with multiple women (Jaki et al. 5; Jennings “Incels Categorize Women”). In essence, a Chad is the embodiment of hegemonic masculinity – both idolized and vilified for his success. A ‘normie’ is a man who is average, one who does not have the looks of Chad but still has success in the sexual marketplace.
28 I refrain from labelling these terms as derogatory in general as it is common for individuals to use these terms to describe themselves, or asking if there was any other currycels, for example, throughout Incels.Co.
Williams 49
A Stacey29 is an “attractive roastie,30 a promiscuous young woman” (Jaki et al. 5). A hyperfeminine and physically attractive woman, a Stacey is ultimately unattainable in the eyes of incels, as it is presumed that they only date Chads (Jennings “Incels Categorize Women”). This finding is consistent with Ging’s observation of the manosphere’s engagement of the evolutionary psychology of their MRM forefathers. Ging notes that this engagement is:
limited to the superficial interpretation and recycling of theories to support a recurring
catalogue of claims: that women are irrational, hypergamous, hardwired to pair with
alpha males, and need to be dominated. (12)
There is a second label for women - Becky. A Becky is simply ‘an average woman’ – unlike
Stacey, who is highly desired but unattainable, Becky is not as highly desired but is slightly more attainable. Becky is seen to have a misplaced sense of entitlement, as one individual claims that
“Stacey doesn’t care but Beckies, they expect beta men, cucks and people like us to give her compliments, worship her, give her money & gifts just because she has a hole” (seija June 2,
2019). The term ‘Becky’ was not created by, nor is it is exclusive to Incel. Perhaps the most famous and well-known use of the term was in Beyonce’s 2016 song “Sorry,” which included the implicitly racialized lyric “Becky with the good hair”. While the origins of the term ‘Becky’ are not clear, nor is there one clearly defined meaning, a consensus in modern discourse is that
Becky is a white woman. Just as with Chad, descriptions and memes of Becky and Stacey depict both women as white, following with a racial hierarchy that ranks whiteness as normative and superior to all other races.
29 The spelling “Stacy” was also used on this forum. 30 A ‘roastie’ refers to a woman with sexual experience; the term is a reference to the labia becoming like roast beef from ‘overuse’ (Tolentino “The Rage of Incels”).
Williams 50
In discussions about a woman who is not designated as a Stacey or Becky, or about women in general, the most commonly used terms effectively strip women’s humanity away.
Terms like foid or femoid, short for ‘female humanoid,’ suggest that women are not even human, they just appear to be. Women are frequently referred to as ‘holes,’ implying women are solely something that can be penetrated. It is a term that effectively marks women as sources of sexual pleasure for men and little else. Much like other Incel terminology, many of the derogatory terms for women focus on the body and physical appearance, with terms such as the aforementioned roastie, or landwhale, which refers to a large woman. All of these terms actively dehumanize women and make the violent misogyny of the Incelosphere that much easier to promulgate.
Chapter 6: Data Analysis
The data for this thesis came from the Incel forum Incels.Co, one of the few publicly accessible Incel forums. The forum was created in November 2017, stemming from a crackdown on policy violations on Reddit, resulting in the permanent banning of Incel forums there. Data was collected from discussion threads posted between November 2017 to January 2020 by manually going through approximately nine hundred pages of discussion threads, with one hundred threads per page, over five months. While this method was arduous, it proved to be incredibly beneficial to this analysis; several key terms, patterns and themes would have been overlooked if a different type of analysis had been employed. Specific threads were selected for further review based on their relevance to themes of masculinity, women, race, sexualities, violence and mental health to gain a more well-rounded understanding of Incel. Threads that included personal experiences or feelings were also selected as they provided an insight into the lives of these individuals and why they have come to Incels.Co to find a “safe space”.
Williams 51
One challenge that arose while collecting this data was the number of individuals whose accounts are banned and whether or not to include their comments and thoughts. It is acknowledged that there was a higher number of bans in the months following the creation of
Incels.Co, some of which may not have been warranted, and there is a page where members can request to have their bans reviewed and potentially lifted. Throughout this research, many members were banned or deleted their accounts and some who were unbanned. Because of this, some comments of members whose accounts were listed as banned were included, though an effort was made to include these sparingly. In selecting which threads and comments to analyze and include in this analysis, I aimed to select material that reflected not just the views of a single individual, which could risk creating a more sensationalist analysis that only reflected a minority or potentially what Incels.Co refers to as “infiltrators.”31 Instead, my goal was to find threads where there was a consensus or, in the case of disagreements, evidence of support for the claims being made. In the case of threads that did not have any comments, if the views were similar to those in other threads which were supported, these single threads were included. Threads where the comments by other members indicated a disagreement or total rejection of the original posters (OP’s) views or that included numerous replies along the lines of “Hi cucktears” or “Hi
IT”32 were not included in this analysis.
Based on the data, I have developed four main themes: (1) Masculinities; (2) Views on
Women; (3) Masculinity and Violence; (4) Masculinity, Mental Health and Self Esteem. These four themes are themselves full of contradictions, highlighting the complex nature of this online
31 Infiltrators are people who have signed up as members but do not identify as incels. These individuals may be members of IncelTears or a like-minded group. Generally, they stir the pot with more extremist comments or ask questions meant to glean specific information (such as is there one Incel ideology). 32 “Cucktears” and “IT” refer to the Reddit forum IncelTears, which frequently posted screenshots from Incel forums such as Incels.Co. It is described by Incel Wiki as promoting “incelphobia” (“/r/inceltears”). The forum was shut down on April 10th, 2020. Another Reddit forum called IncelTear still exists.
Williams 52 subculture. Despite the lack of universal consensus and the consistent contradictions, these four themes still represent core parts of Incel and provide a basic framework for a deeper understanding of Incel while keeping gender as a central focus of analysis. While other themes, such as religion and politics, were certainly evident throughout this research and are worthy of analysis, they are beyond the scope of this thesis.
To help support and give clarity to the analysis of these four main themes, I have included a basic overview of the demographic information gleaned from this research. I have also included a brief analysis of how science and pseudoscience are used by incels to support their world views along with a more in-depth look at sexualities and race. It is important to highlight that this is not a comprehensive study of the Incelosphere or even Incels.Co – throughout the research process contradictions were commonplace. What I present here are dominant views and practices, which remain dominant even in the face of contradictions, and attempt to draw attention to the complexities of a community that has been oversimplified in media discourse.
Demographics
As this is an anonymous forum where members are not required to publicly disclose identifying information about themselves, the analysis of the demographics of this group relied on bi-annual surveys conducted by forum moderator SergeantIncel, polls conducted by individual members, and the language used in discussion threads. The bi-annual surveys provided information pertaining to social categories but also allows for a unique look at more personal details. In the most recent survey posted on September 30, 2019, one question asked,
“Do you believe that you have missed ‘developmental milestones’ that other people have naturally been able to experience?” (SergeantIncel, September 30, 2019). Out of the 548
Williams 53 respondents, 91.8 percent answered “yes,” reinforcing a reoccurring theme of these men feeling that they are behind, that they are not fully men, or even adults, as they have missed vital milestones (in a North American context) in life, such as having a high school sweetheart and having their first kiss as a teenager.
Almost all of the members on this site are male – there is evidence that women have successfully made profiles and joined the forum, but they are usually banned quickly. In a thread titled Rules, Terminology, and FAQ, the first section regarding members clearly states,
“Female[s] (Not Allowed): Banned on sight, no exceptions.” (SergeantIncel November 9, 2017).
While there are no survey questions, polls, or threads that directly address this, the inference made through the language used and discourse between members is that the men on this Incel forum are cisgender, and the majority are heterosexual.33 A likely explanation for the omission of any questions regarding sexuality and gender identity is that cisgender and heterosexuality are positioned as normative. A question regarding sexuality and gender identity would be viewed as redundant in this space. In terms of age, the majority of the five hundred and forty-seven respondents (77.8 percent) in the most recent bi-annual survey responded that they were between the ages of eighteen and thirty years old34 (SergeantIncel September 30, 2019).
While evidence supports the premise that the origins of Incel are located in the West, not all individual incels are, a finding indicative of the transnational nature of the Internet. English is the language of communication, even though for many members, it is not their first language.
Links are occasionally shared in German, Polish and other languages. Countries such as India,
33 While heteronormativity is dominant on this forum, without sufficient data it would be misleading to state that all men on this forum are heterosexual, especially as there have been threads where bisexuality or ‘becoming gay’ as a “cope” are discussed. 34 Approximately 8 percent of respondents stated they were under the age of eighteen, with the remaining 14 percent stating they were above the age of thirty.
Williams 54
Brazil, Germany and Australia, have been mentioned repeatedly in threads and comments regarding geographical location and culturally specific terms, such as ‘caste,’ are used. That being said, the West, specifically the United States and Canada, are very much the focus of Incel critique in terms of gender relations and how (they believe) men are treated by society. Toronto is one of the most frequently mentioned locations, mostly due to how “unfriendly” the city is to incels, as seen in a thread titled Toronto is a FEMINIST HELL for MEN where an individual using the screenname thetruecelibate claims that “Toronto is the worst place to be a cell [sic].”
(May 7, 2018). Another commented that “Toronto needs more Lépines,” a reference to the man who murdered fourteen women during the École Polytechnique Massacre35 in 1989
(FeminimsCancer May 6, 2018).
(Pseudo)Science in the Incelosphere and Defining Theories
Within Incel discourse, there is a determination to prove that the theories and worldviews found in the Incelosphere, such as their views on women, race and biases against men, are true and based on facts and science. To accomplish this, there is a strong emphasis on genetics and biology as a means to understand and validate Incel worldviews. However, rather than engaging in a scientific approach, which strives to prove a claim by seeking evidence which may prove said claim false, a pseudoscientific approach, seeking out evidence to support a specific claim, is used. This pseudoscientific approach is evident in the discourse of Incels.Co, as any reports, studies or data that go against their worldviews are disregarded, labelled feminist propaganda or as somehow being influenced by women or others they consider to be their ‘enemies’. Data that aligns with Incel worldviews can be taken out of context, with one notable example being the
35 Thisè is also referred to as the Montreal Massacre.
Williams 55 graphed results of a survey conducted by General Social Survey and published by the
Washington Post regarding the decline in young people (see Fig.1) reporting sexual activity in the past year (Ingraham “The share of Americans”). The survey results show that 28 percent of men between the ages of eighteen and thirty reported no sex for the past year in 2018, with 18 percent of women reporting the same, following with a trend from 1989 to 2018 of men reporting no sex more than women. The results of this survey have been shared numerous times on Incels.Co as evidence of women’s hypergamy, moulding and using these results to conform to and support their views.
Fig.1: Young men driving the decline in sex from: Ingraham, Christopher. “The share of Americans not having sex has reached a record high.” The Washington Post, 29 March 2019.
The internet is an enabling factor for this pseudoscientific approach. Spaces such as
Incels.Co act as an echo chamber, where an individual can have their own worldviews supported and reinforced without objective opinions or critical engagement. Additionally, the Internet,
Williams 56 especially in recent years, is a space where everything, including established scientific facts, are open to interpretation and questioning. The past four years have seen the rise of ‘alternative facts’ and people using the internet as a pseudoscientific tool to support their views. This tactic occurs in other anti-feminist online spaces such as MRA groups, which utilize “the immense, ephemeral nature of the Internet to their advantage by selectively representing both news stories and research to promote their ideological agenda” (Schmitz and Kazyak 12).
Genetics & Biological Essentialism
Incel discourse holds that everything, from physical appearance to personality, is attributed to genetics: one’s genes will either be their blessing or their curse, and there is little that can be done to change that, aside from plastic surgery. There is a tendency to blame women, in this case, mothers and even grandmothers, for what these individuals believe to be negative traits or “bad genes,” as seen in threads with titles such as Women are the ones responsible for shitty genetics (September 20, 2019). One individual, going by the screenname wereqryan, blames both his mother and his paternal grandmother for ‘diluting his masculinity,’ as he describes them as “subhumans with short height and excess estrogen,” which in turn, he claims, made him have too much estrogen (March 20, 2019). It is part of a pattern of assigning blame to women for all the struggles they, as men and as self-identified incels, experience in life.
This focus on genetics is an extension of the biological and psychological essentialism used within the Incelosphere. It serves as a means to ground their ideological views in science and fact and thereby legitimize their views. Biological and psychological essentialism were key components of the men’s liberation movement and men’s movements of the twentieth century and are reinforced by Incel ideology, but also contradicted within it. This simultaneous reinforcement and contradiction are perhaps most apparent in the discourse on women and
Williams 57 traditional (read patriarchal) gender norms and roles. Women in the Incelosphere are constructed in a way that draws on both historical and contemporary stereotypes for women and for men, one of many contradictions that defines Incels views of women. Women are still positioned as objects of desire while at the same time seen as dangerous – capable of conferring on men the greatest pleasure as well as the greatest pain. The patriarchal view of women being emotionally chaotic and irrational is still maintained, legitimizing the need for patriarchal control, as one individual, who compares women to children in a candy store, claims women “need a strict society to impose parental control over them and manage their basic urges” (wereqryan June 21,
2019). However, this construct does not fit with the narrative of women as being cold creatures, denying men access to their bodies based on physical appearance. So, they are conversely portrayed as less connected to their emotions than men, instead driven by lust and the basic urges of a reptilian brain. One individual, Involuntarily, suggests that “the ‘lizard brain’ still overrides a lot of our higher consciousness, and it is easy to revert to lower thoughts that do not require much thinking. Women do not need to have higher thoughts [sic] so it was mostly bred out, men, however, do” (December 24, 2018). This view of women is in keeping with Western gender stereotypes, which position intelligence and rationality with men. Men, while still driven by biology, have evolved to develop more emotional intelligence, as one individual using the screenname ScornedStoic asserts, that “despite being insanely horny, men experience actual love and desire for real relationships,” exercising control over their biology that women, in his view, are unable to (December 8, 2018). In the Incelosphere, positioning emotional intelligence as a masculine attribute does not conflict with logic and reason that have traditionally been marked as masculine; they can exist in the same masculine sphere. It aids in both positioning men as more
Williams 58 evolved and in control of themselves, but also in reinforcing a victim identity for incels with women as the victimizers.
Men’s sexual promiscuity has long been a common gender stereotype, reaching new heights in the 1960s and 1970s with the Sexual Revolution. Men are constructed as inherently more sexual than women are, having a “natural predisposition towards promiscuity, sex without love” (Kimmel, Manhood in America 258: Smiler 41). In the Incelosphere, this trope is flipped, with women being inherently more promiscuous, generally referred to a ‘women’s/female hypergamy.’ Considered to be one of the main reasons that Incel exists, women’s hypergamy is rooted in the biological essentialism of the Incelosphere, where women are driven by basic biological urges to mate with an attractive man. In a thread titled The real problem with hypergamy, one individual describes hypergamy as women using romantic and sexual relationships with men to fulfil their desire for higher social status:
The hypergamous [woman]…tries to make herself believe and make her target believe
that her attitude is guided by her feelings, her desires, or other reasons judged by herself
and by society as more legitimate than the desire for higher status. And in many cases,
this attraction is sincere: hypergamy is not necessarily lying; it is simply “programmed”
like that. (giganticel September 30, 2018)
Second-Wave Feminism and the Sexual Revolution are the most frequently cited reasons for present-day women’s hypergamy. Responding to a thread titled what is the reason behind modern day hypergamy, one individual claimed that “It started with giving women rights. From there it’s a domino effect of degeneracy and promiscuity” (Insomniac December 24, 2018). The argument is that in “giving” women rights and freedoms, their natural predisposition to hypergamy now has no constraints. An individual going by the screenname giganticel claims that
Williams 59
“In a patriarchal society where the woman is the property of the man, these highly destructive social relations are controlled by the institution of marriage”, however, “In a society where women are freed from the tutelage of the man – in other words, a society in which the sex market is deregulated – female hypergamy is totally unbridled” (September 30, 2018). NeetSupremacist, agrees, asserting that women were always hypergamous, that “the nature of women is in itself profound[ly] hypergamous”, one that was historically suppressed but now society “gave women the means and mechanisms to fulfill their wishes in practicing hypergamy” (June 22, 2019).
Another individual, SkinnyBaldcel, goes so far as to posit that “maybe feminism is a biological urge to satisfy so that they can chose [sic] the best genes due to sexual freedom, womens [sic] rights etc. So its like hypergamy is inevitable if women get enough rights” (January 20, 2019). It is considered as part of women’s nature, their genes, something they cannot change and can only be controlled through patriarchal authority, which feminism disrupted. This narrative effectively positions men, specifically incels, as the victims of women’s uncontrolled biology and society controlled by feminism.
Sexualities
Sex and (hetero)sexuality have become a defining aspect of Incel, much of that due to mainstream media reporting. While it is certainly not the only defining aspect of Incel, it is fundamental to how this community defines itself. The name Incel itself, a portmanteau of the words “involuntarily” and “celibate,” directly relates to sex, and virginity is a recurring topic of discussion. The dominant views on sex and sexuality within the Incelosphere are, like many other aspects of Incel, influenced by hegemonic masculinity and the masculinities rhetoric of past men’s movements.
Williams 60
The policing and normalizing of heterosexuality and establishing of a heteronormative space are central aspects of how hegemonic masculinity operates. Connell notes that in patriarchal ideology, “Gayness…is the repository of whatever is symbolically expelled from hegemonic masculinity” and viewed as being “easily assimilated to femininity” (Masculinities
78). This policing is evident within the Incelosphere, exemplified in a response to a thread titled
Only straight CIS men can be incel which states, “The one and only combination of an incel is being a straight man who is not a tranny or some other shit” (BlackOpsllcel September 20,
2018). In response to another thread, an individual using the screenname NeetAndTidy claims,
“There have been fags here that have been banned from here,” reinforcing the Incelosphere as a heteronormative space (February 12, 2019). This pattern of reinforcing heteronormativity is common in homosocial spaces, as it negates the risk of being emasculated and feminized. For the
Incel community, the reinforcing of heteronormativity is especially important, as this is a homosocial space that exists for men who have not had sexual or romantic relationships with women and are therefore at greater risk of emasculation and feminization.
The dominant rhetoric of Incel dictates that any sexual identity outside of strict heterosexuality, whether it be homosexuality, bisexuality, or other sexual identities, is deemed a
“cope,” a consciously made decision. While no direct challenge is levied against this dominant view, there are divergences and variances found within the Incelosphere. Some men assert that sexuality is not entirely a conscious choice, but rather the result of genetic and environmental factors. One man with the screenname RabbiStenowitz claims, “Homosexuality is likely a result of some prenatal genetic mutation/silencing” (February 12, 2019). Others claim that everything from the radiation from phones to soymilk lowers testosterone and, therefore, “turns” men gay.
While some may concede that genetics and environment are factors, women are still considered
Williams 61 to be the main cause of homosexuality, with frequent claims such as “many gays actually do go gay because they cannot get a female or because of negative experiences with the opposite sex”
(universallyabhorred February 12, 2019). One individual ponders, “I wonder how many men would be gay if they all had a chance with foids,” reinforcing heterosexuality as the default normative (Remyx February 12, 2019). Addressing these perspectives is not done as a means to try and minimize the homophobia that is very much part of the dominant rhetoric on sexualities but to highlight the complex and heterogeneous nature of the Incelosphere.
This dominant view of sexuality being a choice, one influenced by a lack of sexual access to women, is not unique to Incel; hooks identifies a similar pattern in how male sexuality is taught to boys and men. Boys and men, she maintains, are taught that “a man deprived of sexual access will ultimately be sexual with any body. If deprived long enough, even if he is straight he will have sex with another man” (hooks 77-78). hooks’ claim is highly apparent in conversations regarding sexuality; posting under the screenname chudur-budur, one man asserts that
There is no such thing called homosexuality, a man starts to fuck another man when both
have [a] hard time getting a female, that’s why many straight men turn into fags in
prisons…Yes, there might be other reasons, but none of those reasons are “natural” or
“normal” like people try to force-feed you in 2018. (December 18, 2018)
In another thread titled How many gay men are truly gay an individual using the screenname
Nothingness claims that “90 % of them chose to be gay because they could not compete for abtaining [sic] girls”, while zangano 1 suggests, “Most of them are coping” (July 14, 2019). The
Williams 62 notion that homosexuality36 is a natural part of the human experience is rejected as Western masculinities have and continue to be defined by heterosexual relations.
The Incelosphere is a heterosexual, but homosocial environment, which complicates and influences views on homosexuality and gay men. Some argue that gay men are indirectly aiding incels as they “remove themselves from the pool of potential suitors for females” (FukkenLoser
November 11, 2018). Others take a more ambivalent position, as one individual comments,
“Who cares if they’re degenerates? They’re doing it among themselves, not to women. So quit your bitching and start hating on the people who take your potential partners away,” simultaneously rejecting hatred towards gay men while using homophobic tropes
(RREEEEEEEEE November 11, 2018). In a majority of these comments and discussions, however, bigotry and homophobia are rife, with comments such as “faggots are disgusting degenerates who need to choke on Zyklon B,” “AIDS is Gods punishment for fags” and “Fags are degenerate, kill them all” were also present (Albocel December 17, 2018; Zesto November
11, 2018; ManletHalfCurry November 11, 2018). These types of homophobic comments, according to Kimmel, reflect more than simply fearing that they “might be perceived as gay,” it is about a fear that they will be unmasked and emasculated by other men, revealed to not be real men, to “not measure up” (“Masculinity as Homophobia” 131). The word “faggot” is one that is frequently used on Incels.Co, which, according to David Leverenz, is not about homosexuality or a fear of it, but rather that it “comes out of the depths of manhood: a label of ultimate contempt for anyone who seems sissy, untough, uncool” (Leverenz qtd. in Kimmel, “Masculinity as
36 Bisexuality was also mentioned with some frequency; however, it was positioned as more of a steppingstone from heterosexuality to homosexuality. Asexuality was occasionally brought up as a potential cope, but other sexualities were generally absent from these discussions.
Williams 63
Homophobia” 131). Homophobia functions as a means to reassert and police the performance of hegemonic masculinity in the Incelosphere.
The online discussions about sexuality are not restricted to men, as individuals often include their ideas about women in these discussions. However, there is a striking difference between online discussions about gay men versus gay women. The existence of gay men, whether this is the result of genetics or coping, is recognized, however, the existence of “true” lesbians, women who are genuinely attracted to other women, is rebuffed entirely. A familiar construction of gender and sexuality in the West, the existence of women’s sexuality is denied, existing only for the purpose of procreation. In nineteenth-century America, it was close relationships between an unmarried man and woman that were taboo and inherently sexual, while close relationships between two women were unremarkable, as women during this time were viewed as “passionless” under Victorian sexual ideology (Smith-Rosenberg 9; Cott 220). A similar narrative that women’s sexuality is driven by biology and procreation exists in Incel rhetoric. Relationships in the Incelosphere are understood in the context of heteronormativity, so while women entering into relationships with other women are recognized, there are limitations to this recognition. The consensus is that lesbian relationships only occur when a suitable man is not available and that there is “No such thing as lesbians” (W33bcel October 19, 2019). As one individual claims, “Gay men have been documented throughout history. It’s lesbians who truly don’t exist, women can change their sexuality at whim when there’s no Chad” (iFartAtRoasties
February 12, 2019). Another forcefully asserts that “Lesbian = chadsexual [sic] Straightgirls [sic]
= chadsexual [sic] There is no fucking lesbian on this earth” (Ugly_equals_Death October 19,
2019). Heterosexuality is viewed as normative, while anything outside of that paradigm is merely a cope; for men, it is coping with the negative experiences and rejection at the hands of
Williams 64 women, and for women it is waiting until a suitable man, or a Chad, comes along. It is their high standards, posits an individual with the screenname Potbellypos, that causes women to “go lesbian,” further commenting that “Women would rather jump into a vat of acid than be with a sub8”37 (Potbellypos December 17, 2018). While some concede that women can be gay, such as one individual who goes by DaveBuster,38 he also asserts that, “True lesbianism is rare, your average feminist tries really hard to make it work but of course it never does and she just wants
Chad” (May 12, 2019). Even while heterosexuality is positioned and reinforced as normative, there is room for some fluidity in the Incelosphere. This fluidity is different for men and women: while generally seen to be a cope, there is some acceptance that men can truly be gay. The same cannot be said for women because to accept lesbianism would mean accepting that lesbians are rejecting all men, not just incels. This would challenge the theory of women’s hypergamy, which claims that women are biologically driven to have sexual relations with attractive men, and undermines the heteronormativity of the Incelosphere. Most importantly, it would challenge incels claims of victimhood at the hands of women, leaving them with no one to blame.
Race
Race in an integral component to any analysis of Incel: it carries over through several of the identified themes, and therefore an understanding of how race operates in this space is vital.
Incel has been described in news media as a community of angry and entitled white men, especially in the days immediately following the Toronto Van Attack in April 2018. In an NBC article initially published one day after the attack, Heidi Beirich, director of the Southern Poverty
Law Center’s Intelligence Project, stated that Incel was a group of “aggrieved young men,”
37 A “sub8” refers to someone who, on a scale of one to ten in terms of appearance, is less than an eight on that scale. It is commonly used to highlight the high standards of women. 38 In the small description section underneath his screen he has put “Inceldom is not about the sex act.”
Williams 65 specifically “young, frustrated white males in their late teens into their early twenties who are having a hard time adjusting to adulthood” (qtd. in Collins and Zadronzny, “After Toronto attack”). In a Washington Post article published two days after the attack, Ross Haenfler, an associate professor of sociology whose research focuses on masculinity and subcultures, claimed that incels “are primarily heterosexual white men who are directing their anger in a misogynistic way towards women” (qtd. in Ohlheiser, “Inside the online world of ‘incels’”). A Maclean’s article published two weeks after the attack reaffirmed the (misinformed) belief that Incel is a community of white men, stating, “Their [incels’] loneliness, angst, and the feeling of lost power are a pitiable cover story to a problem with white male subcultures that reaches back several years and into some of the darkest corners of the internet” (Domise, “The hidden crisis”).
Because of Incel's connection with the alt-right, as well as the presumed whiteness of the perpetrators of both the Toronto Van Attack and the Isla Vista Attack,39 the assumption has been made that Incel was another group of angry white men.
The reality of Incel is that it is a racially diverse community. Jaki et al. concluded that
“There is no definite evidence that Incels.me users are predominantly white, contrary to what is often reported about incels” (14). In response to a discussion thread where two women discuss
Incel on the CBC News feature Understanding Incel: The Dark Subculture Explained a man using the screenname ManletHalfCurry mocks their claim of “mostly white young men,” crassly asserting that these “stupid bitches have no idea what they are talking about” (November 6,
2018). Another individual, who describes himself as a “Mexicancel in America,” responds to these comments, referring to the two women as “clueless twats” and agreeing that “most incels are ethnic, these lefty types cant [sic] deal with this fact” (Life Wasted November 7, 2018). In a
39 Minassian’s family is, allegedly, originally from Iraq and Rodger identified himself as “half White, half Asian.”
Williams 66 thread titled Incels aren’t the real racists, you are, an individual using the screenname
Bronzehawkattack asserts that “to claim that incel as a whole is racist is ignorant” (May 8, 2018).
Another individual with the screenname Rightful Anger responds to the discussion in agreement, stating that “I’m a white incel and I agree that white men have it easier generally,” a subtle acknowledgement of the privilege of whiteness in the West although this is far from common
(May 8, 2018). The racial diversity of Incels.Co supports Bronzehawkattack’s claim, and so to state that Incel as a whole is racist would indeed be ignorant. That being said, racism is certainly not absent from the Incelsophere, clearly evident in discussion threads with titles such as Why don't ethnicels and ricecels from the West just go back to their own countries, where a man using the screenname Unwanted claims that ethnicels have no right to complain about how life is in the
West and should go back to “their countries,” then suggests they will not because they are seeking white women (September 12, 2018). This comment received considerable pushback, with responses such as, “Why don’t Europeans just go back to Europe? Your future wife awaits” and “why don’t you ‘americans’[sic] go back to britian [sic]. america [sic] isn’t [sic] your country either” (Zaetheus; Hunter September 12, 2018). This pushback suggests a sense that inceldom and incel identity is not predicated on race, though there are certainly tensions along the lines of race evident within this online community. A person using the screenname Veganist frankly states in an exchange with another individual regarding ethnicels leaving North America that ‘we hear “go back to’ […] argument a lot,” highlighting those tensions (December 9, 2018).
Race is used as a dividing factor on Incels.Co, demarcating one group from another, and there are very strong views about ‘loyalty’ to one’s racial group. Interracial relationships are a recurring topic of discussion, and, as is a theme within Incel, while there are mixed views on the subject, the damaging rhetoric was the loudest. A man who uses the screenname Bakura806
Williams 67 makes his views clear in a thread titled I fucking hate interracial relationships. “Seeing that shit almost everyday is straight cancerous,” he writes (December 6, 2018). The sentiment is shared by other incels, with comments such as, “All you desperatecels who doesn’t see anything wrong with racemixing should just rope already” and “Race-mixing should be punishable by capital punishment” (SLAVICMorPheus November 10, 2018; Volcel420 May 14, 2018). To many members of Incels.Co, this rhetoric is not racist as one individual, Kointo, claims, “Not wanting to be cucked by another race other than your own isn’t racism” (May 14, 2018). Not all incels are so vehemently opposed to interracial relationships; in response to a thread titled Incel Trait getting salty when a man of a different race dates a woman of your race, WawelDragon1683 claims that “I used to care but i [sic] really don’t anymore. It doesn’t matter” (November 18,
2019). In the discourse surrounding interracial relationships, the animosity is almost exclusively directed at women,40 with threads entitled I despise race traitor foids and Race Traitor Foids Are
Garbage. Interracial relationships are misconstrued as evidence of women’s inability to be loyal and are used to support Incel’s view of women as being biologically driven, cold, and dangerous, noted in the claim of one individual that, “Foids have no concept of loyalty or allegiance.
Everything they do is based on how much it will benefit them. So if it means betraying her own people then so be it” (Insomniac November 8, 2018).
Language reinforces these racial divides, positioning white as normative. This is evident in the use of the term “Chad,” applied to men who are viewed as examples of the performance of hegemonic masculinity and sexual success with women. Not all men who meet these criteria are labelled as “Chads” – a South-Asian man is labelled “Chadpreet,” an East-Asian man “Chang,”
40 The Incelopshere is a heteronormative space; as a result, when potential or imagined relationships are discussed it is implied that they are heterosexual.
Williams 68 and a black man is labelled “Tyrone,” terms that are highly racialized and play off racial stereotypes. Occasionally the term “white Chad” will be used; however, it is noted that this is redundant “because chad can only be white” (NeverSubmit May 16, 2018). This leaves the term
“Chad” as one that is inherently based on whiteness.
It is important to address two particularly notable findings in this research with regards to race: blatant antisemitism and discussions regarding Indigenous peoples. On Incels.Co being
Jewish is conceptualized as a racial identity; as one individual crudely states, “Jews are not fucking white” (averageblockcel February 12, 2019). Although the rules of the site indicate that racism and antisemitism will not be permitted, the term “Jew” is regularly used in a derogatory manner, there are frequent references to Hitler, and many engage in conspiracy theory-like rhetoric regarding Jewish people. Most of this antisemitism is buried within the comments of seemingly random and unrelated threads. For example, in [Theory] Feminism is fueled by women's desire for chad hypergamy: one individual posted a photo of fifty-five Jewish feminists, such as Blu Greenberg and Ruth Bader Ginsburg,41 along with the comment “Feminism is fueled by Zionist desire to depopulate Earth.” In another comment, responding to a thread titled Women are the ones responsible for shitty genetics, stated, “Water is wet. This is the result of a Zionist agenda to fuck the gene pool as much as possible by promoting hypergamy and overestimating the ‘beauty’ of ugly foids, while simultaneously undervaluing male worth” (ERadicator
September 20, 2019).
In the majority of my research on men’s movements and race, Indigenous peoples rarely, if ever, were mentioned. To find discussions that included Indigenous peoples was surprising.
41 Ginsburg is non-observant due to women’s exclusion from minyan (quorum of ten Jewish adults necessary for prayer and other religious practices).
Williams 69
While there were some discussion threads questioning whether there were any Indigenous incels, to which a few responded, the majority of threads and comments followed a set pattern of racial hierarchy, with Indigenous peoples positioned near the bottom. Many of these posts focused on the Indigenous peoples of Australia, and a majority of those followed racist tropes of Indigenous people being unattractive, unintelligent and dependent on government handouts. In a thread titled
Are Aboriginals the ugliest race, one individual responds with “Yep, That’s [sic] why almost all of them are fucked.” Another crudely states that, “Ya Australian Abos [sic] should just be genocieded [sic]. They also have the lowest IQ at 62” (June 22, 2018). There is a recurring theme of dehumanizing in comments made regarding Indigenous Australians, as seen in a thread titled
Are Aboriginal Australians human in your opinion, which included a poll in which a majority of respondents answered ‘No.’ A response to the question Do Aboriginal Australians date outside their race coarsely declared “nope. beastiality [sic] isnt [sic] legal in australia [sic],” inferring that Indigenous people in Australia are not human. A similar attitude is seen in response to the thread Meet the Chadorigine, to which the respondent claimed, “Abos [sic] are some of the most distantly related ‘human’ beings out there, to the point you really wouldn’t classify them the same as us.” This particular statement was challenged by another individual who rejected it as
“bogus racist science,” although this sort of pushback is the exception rather than the rule.
Masculinities in the Incelosphere: Navigating the Contradictions
The performance of masculinities in the Incelosphere is riddled with complexities and paradoxes, beginning with how masculinity and gender are understood. Gender is viewed as a fixed biological state; one is born either male or female,42 but, for those identified as male, they
42 Like heteronormativity, the gender binary is heavily enforced in Incel discourse. Transgender persons are often referred to in derogatory terms such as “trannies” and, in the case of trans women, who are discussed with particular disdain, “traps”. There is minimal recognition of non-binary persons in this online space.
Williams 70 must also “become” a man and achieve manhood in the public sphere, a familiar notion in
Western society (Sanday 345). The dominant belief is that, as incels, they did not fully succeed in ‘becoming’ men: either the individual themselves believes they are not a man or believes that society does not view them as men (they may or may not see themselves the same way). In a thread bluntly titled I am not man enough for a woman, a man who goes by the screenname weirdguy22 clearly expresses this very sentiment, stating that
I always knew that women didn’t take me seriously. The ones that did not hate me but
like me as a guy never saw me as a man. Just a boy. The reality is that women close their
vaginas for everyone and everything who is neither man enough no good looking. A man
according to a womans [sic] definition is tall, good looking and has a horse cock.
(October 14, 2019) weirdguy22’s claims reflect a common pattern on Incels.Co and draw attention to the two core qualities incels view as defining masculinity. The reasons why an incel believes that he is not considered to be a man in the eyes of society vary from individual to individual, but generally follows a specific pattern: a lack of physical attractiveness, one of the defining features of masculinity for incels, results in social and romantic rejection. This rejection means that important life milestones (in a North American context) are missed and that the proper performance of masculinity is inhibited, a crucial part of which is having intimate relationships with women.
Physical appearance and attractiveness, the catalyst for this cycle of social and romantic rejection in the eyes of incels, is strongly connected to masculinity. For many incels, it is as straightforward as “[m]asculinity is looks” and, as one man claims, “If you’re good looking you’ll be perceived as masculine no matter what you do” (mental_out June 1, 2019). What is
Williams 71 considered physically attractive, according to incels, is not subjective but is rooted in biology.
Their idea of what constitutes physical attractiveness for men is constructed in relation to hegemonic masculinity: a man must be tall and strong, not just in terms of physical strength but also must have strong bone structure, all signalling strong genetics worthy of being passed on.
Because their (perceived) lack of physical attractiveness is considered the main reason for their inceldom, many incels interpret this as a failure to embody and perform masculinity successfully.
The prevailing theory as to why the successful performance of masculinity is based on physical appearance places the blame on women and feminism; specifically, the social changes brought about by Second-Wave Feminism.43 It was women and feminism that “created a world in which men are judged on their physical appearance and nothing else” one man argues, stating that prior to (Second-Wave) feminism “men were judged on multiple factors – looks would come into play, but also achievements, intelligence, personality, manners, class, conversation skills”
(MayorOfKekville February 23, 2019). Now, many incels feel, they live in a world that judges masculinity based on physical appearance, a sentiment that is exacerbated by entertainment and social media. Since they are incels, because of their own beliefs that they lack physical attractiveness, they are made to chase an ideal that is out of their reach and subsequently punished for their inability to meet this unattainable standard.
This cycle begins with physical attractiveness (or lack there-of) and can only be ended through a sexual relationship with a woman, positioning heterosexual sex as a defining element of how one ‘earns’ their masculinity within the Incelosphere. The concept of earning masculinity is key here and is about more than merely the act of having intercourse. Paying for sex,
43 The majority of the comments pertaining to feminism on Incels.Co do not specify between First, Second and Third Waves and are generally understood to mean Second-Wave Feminism.
Williams 72 commonly referred to as “escortcelling,” is viewed as a cope, but not as a path to ascension. Part of ascending is that a woman finds you attractive and wants to enter into a romantic or sexual relationship. To make a comparison, paying for sex would be the equivalent of paying for test answers instead of studying and passing the test yourself – there is no real achievement. There are even some who discount a sexual relationship with a woman who is not a virgin, her virginity being the ultimate transformative power. Smiler claims that heterosexual sex is no longer considered to be a defining element of masculinity in relation to hegemonic masculinity and the
Manbox (47). This may be a global trend; however, evidence suggests that it still plays a significant role in defining masculinity in Western society. Within the online MRA movement,
Schmitz and Kazyak identify a similar pattern where “sexual relationships with women are exalted as the primary marker of idealized masculinity” (7). Many men are left wondering what happens if they fail to achieve this standard, epitomized in an interview with one young man, who states that,
Society says that you have to have a lot of sex with a lot of different women to be a real
man. Well what happens if you don’t? Then what are you? Are you half a man? Are you
still a boy? It’s ridiculous. You see a whisky ad with a guy and two women on his arm.
The implication is that real men don’t have any trouble getting women. (qtd. in Beneke
375)
Heterosexual relationships have become ingrained in Western society as a defining aspect of achieving and successfully performing masculinity, a fact noted by hooks. “No matter how many men in our nation [the United States] are celibate,” she observes, “people still believe that sex is something men have to have” (76-77). The roots of this association between masculinity and sex were in the 1970s when male promiscuity became more normalized as an acceptable
Williams 73 performance of masculinity in the West (Smiler 41). In the case of Incel, with its origins in the
West, these societal expectations of what it means to be a man and achieve masculinity are deeply embedded, as one man ruefully claims that maybe if he had been taught to “be big, strong and sleep around” maybe he “wouldn’t be an incel” (wizardcel October 13, 2019).
The impacts of this are visible in how incels view themselves and each other. Some incels view themselves as not worthy of being a ‘man.’ For example, one individual claims, “Only
Chad is entitled to being [sic] a man. The rest of us and the next generation will be feminised
[sic] and ‘genderless’” (RegisterUserName May 11, 2019). Others internalize the feminization of failing to perform hegemonic masculinity; one man laments in a discussion thread he titled my manhood has been stolen that he has “zero [of] the characteristics a man should have but all the characteristics a woman has” and believes himself to be “socially castrated” (September 17,
2018). These comments are evidence that incels are aware of the fact that men are expected to achieve their manhood, as one individual quotes the research of Joseph Vandello, a professor of psychology, stating, “Manhood is not a developmental certainty. Manhood requires social proof”
(Numb June 24, 2019). Many who question these gendered societal expectations do so by contrasting the expectations for men with those they think exist for women. In a thread titled the title MAN is earned, the title WOman is given, a man using the screenname uninstall asks “have u [sic] ever noticed how women try to shame you by saying you are not a real man[?]”, adding that “they expect to ‘behave like a man’[and] you have to work for it [sic].” For women, he contends, all they have to do to “become a woman” is “swipe on tinder” (October 8, 2018).
These sentiments echo the sex role theories of the mid-twentieth century, where “men become but women only need to be” and the early MRA’s who also asserted that masculinity must be earned or achieved (Sanday 345: Clatterbough 886). This is where the belief that the
Williams 74 expectations for men are greater than those for women, and that men have it harder, really begins. It is also where the resentment towards women and the sense of male victimhood begin as well.
While there is a clear desire expressed in these comments to successfully perform and be recognized as performing hegemonic masculinity, evident from copes such as looksmaxxing and betabuxxing, there are also critiques of narrow masculine stereotypes and hegemonic masculinity, albeit in an indirect manner that usually pins the blame on women. The expectation that men be stoic and unemotional financial providers are the stereotypes most frequently challenged in the threads. One man argues that men who are not Chads and “aren’t providing value as their stoic masculine patriarchal figure” are doomed in the eyes of women, whom he refers to as “infantile, spoiled hyper-privileged whores” (wereqryan April 23, 2019). He goes on to say that men expected to “stoically bear the weight of the provider role as a robotic beast of burden” and are not allowed to have any weakness, flaws or insecurities, even be human, as these “luxuries are reserved for women,” an ironic statement given that women are regularly dehumanized both in and outside the Incelosphere (wereqryan April 23, 2019). In recent decades, more work has been done in the area of masculinities, and more recognition is given to the implications of this narrow construct of Western manhood. Despite this, on Incels.Co, there is a strong narrative that these issues have gone unnoticed by society, that the issues men face do not matter as much as women’s and are minimized by society. It is a narrative that mirrors those of men’s liberation and MRA’s.
These contradictions and paradoxes indicate that this is not a straightforward example of male privilege and hegemonic masculinity; it is far more complex than that. Because of the heterogeneous nature of the Incelosphere, there is not one singular masculinity performed in this
Williams 75 space; instead, there are elements of multiple masculinities, including hegemonic masculinity. In
Western society, the intersectionality of the performance of masculinities is more evident; however, in the Incelosphere, gender is the dominant social identifier. The result is that, although my research indicates that the Incelosphere is a racially diverse space, masculinities that are based in whiteness, such as geek and hybrid masculinities, are performed. They are a source of validation for aggrieved entitlement and men who see themselves as victims.
One of the primary ways in which both geek and hybrid masculinities operate is through the repudiation and reification of core aspects of hegemonic masculinity, although how this operates in the Incelosphere is not as clear cut (Massanari 332). In the case of men’s bodies and physical strength, some men, such as anon1822, see transforming their bodies to meet this standard as a way of signalling their masculinity. anon1822 says that he sees the “importance of gymcelling now. It might not get you women, but there are certain things a man must do to be a man, and being physically strong is one of those things,” reinforcing a hegemonic masculine stereotype (anon1822 March 31, 2019). However, there are also men who firmly reject this notion. Intellect and rational thought are highly valued in the Incelosphere, keeping with traditional masculine stereotypes. There is also an emphasis put on men’s emotional intelligence, with claims such as “men’s emotions are far more complex, and felt on a deeper level” if only to reinforce the narrative that women are driven by primal biological urges and are incapable of emotional intelligence (Chris_Jones February 19, 2019).
The first core function of hybrid masculinities, positioning the masculinities of young, white, heterosexual men as less than those associated with marginalized and Othered men, is most evident in debates over who has it worse (Bridges and Pascoe 246). There are reoccurring debates on Incels.Co that white men have it harder and repeated claims that if you are a white
Williams 76 incel, then it is truly over. Unlike ‘ethnicels’, for a white man to be an incel, claims a man who goes by the screenname Total Imbecile, there must be “something really wrong with you” (May
21, 2018). Another man describes being a white man as “the worst curse on earth”
(MayorOfKekville June 13, 2019). These claims are not accepted by all incels, as one individual compellingly notes, “if white incels acknowledge that ethnics have it worse than them, then that reduces their own victimhood and identity of being an incel” (wereqryan April 11, 2019). This premise of white men having it worse is also contradicted by the prevalence of the “Just Be
White” or JBW theory, which is based on the assumption that white men are more successful with women in Western societies. This theory is itself a source of contestation, but it does shine a light on both the pattern of contradictory claims and the heterogeneous nature of Incel.
The second function of hybrid masculinities is the symbolic distancing of men from hegemonic masculinity: this is accomplished through the claim that men, and incels, in particular, are marginalized and treated as lesser by society (Bridges and Pascoe 250). Some of the claims made are quite extreme, demonstrating a deep need to position themselves as marginalized. One of the ways this is accomplished is by making comparisons to marginalized groups. One individual claims, for example, that incels are “only considered 9/20ths of a person,” which makes them “more oppressed than blacks during the 1800s” (Not_Important
September 9, 2018). Another man, going by the screenname Sadness, asserts that American men in 2019 are basically second-class citizens and that their oppression is “worse than that of Jews in 1943 and blacks in 1850” (November 23, 2019). Under these conditions, aggrieved entitlement and victim complex can flourish.
My study reveals the ways in which masculinities are conceptualized and performed in the Incelosphere cannot be neatly categorized as one thing or the other: it is messy and complex,
Williams 77 representing the diverse life experiences and world views of these men. There is an evident struggle for those within the Incelosphere to conform to limiting stereotypes of what it means to
“be a man” in Western society. This narrative co-exists with one of masculinity being under attack by women and feminism, reminiscent of the claims made by men’s liberationists when
Second-Wave feminists moved from critiquing concepts to actual behaviours. The performance of geek and hybrid masculinities creates space for incels, primarily white incels, to position themselves as marginalized and victimized. The construction of gender in the Incelosphere is not entirely removed from power and privilege, but places women and femininity in that position, creating more distance between power and privilege and masculinities. This, in turn, impacts how women and femininity are viewed in the Incelosphere.
The Madonna and the Whore: Incel’s Views of Women
Women are a frequent topic of discussion in Incels.Co, and while there are dominant views that have come to define Incel, like many other aspects of this community, there is no monolithic view of women. A vital component of understanding Incel’s views of women is recognizing and acknowledging the echo chamber effect in this online community. Incels.Co is a space where rampant misogyny is dominant, not necessarily because men come to this space already with this view but through the echo chamber effect. Several men have noted in their comments that they did not hate women when they first joined Incels.Co, but that since joining and learning the “true nature” of women, their hatred and resentment towards women has grown.
One man states that, “I did not start to hate until a couple of months after I found this place. I know life is not fair and I still can’t accept how women are allowed to behave” (WithoutMe
October 13, 2018). Misogyny is constructed not as a behaviour learned from peers, but as a natural consequence of humiliation and rejection at the hands of women. A man who goes by
Williams 78
Redpill Robert, describing himself as a “Supreme Gentleman King of Incels, Pro slut-shamer,” asserts that misogynists are made by women, that incels “didn’t just randomly wake up one day and say ‘I fucking hate women!’ No, stuff happened in our lives that made us grow to resent them” (January 19, 2019). He goes on to claim that if women would just learn to be “decent” to their fellow human beings, it would “do far more to end ‘misogyny’ practically overnight than all the decades of feminism ever have” (Redpill Robert January 19, 2019). Misogyny, then, is the hatred of women, but to the men of Incel whose comments are examined in this study, this hatred is justified and even brought on by women themselves.
How the comments studied portray women is complex and convoluted. Some view women in very rigid terms as the source of all their pain and misery, and therefore they should not be desired. There are others (albeit a minority) who claim not to hate women at all, instead directing any anger at other men, the ‘cucks’ and Chads who are monopolizing the sexual marketplace. However, there are far more men who occupy a grey area, caught between the anger and resentment they feel towards women and their desire for them. In a thread titled, I hate women but I love women, a man who goes by anon1822 expresses his conflicting views, claiming that “The constant hate for their minds and love for their bodies is making me bipolar”
(September 7, 2018). His comments highlight a reoccurring theme of hating women as a group but also as individual people, hating their thoughts, opinions and how they act while concurrently desiring their bodies. One man, who uses the screen Gremlincel, expresses frustration with the notion that incels thrive off misogyny in a thread titled [Venting] I never wanted to hate women.
“I’d tired of our enemies, those who want us dead, acting as if we like hating women, acting as if we don’t want the bluepill to be true,” he says, asserting that incels do want the Blue Pill to be true as “that world is heaven in comparison to reality” (June 10, 2018). He goes on to say that
Williams 79 accepting this “reality isn’t fun in the slightest” and how “None of us enjoy the fact that who we are as people has never and will never matter” (Gremlincel June 10, 2018). His comments indicate a sense of having no choice, of being pushed by circumstance to accept the Black Pill, and misogyny, because a relationship with a woman seems too far out of reach. Comments like
Gremlincel’s reveal a hatred towards women that comes from the belief that they have put him and other men in this position. At the same time, women are still desired, conflicting views that are, in fact, quite revealing when taking into account that it is not necessarily women as individual persons who are desired, but more often their bodies. These views on women are best summarized as a Madonna/Whore dichotomy, albeit a rather complex one.
The ‘perfect woman’ is an ideal and, to some, she is the only acceptable woman; she is the Madonna. While Stacey is frequently mentioned and positioned as desirable, she is not necessarily the perfect woman. The construct of the ‘perfect woman’ is always young, always a virgin; in a discussion thread he titled Virgin petite girls are superior to landwhales, old hangs,
Cuyen claims that “Nothing can beat a virgin gf [sic], not landwhales or “young” foids who got over a hundred dicks. its [sic] either petite virgin gf [sic] or death my friends” (September 16,
2019). These are reoccurring sentiments, as seen in a thread by Albocel titled I want a cute virgin girlfriend I hate disgusting whores with sexual experience They are filth.44 Others claim that
“There are no female virgins left by 18,” therefore this desire in “impossible”, a statement that underscores why youth is viewed as an integral part of the construct of the ‘ideal’ woman
(diogenes January 27, 2019). The symbol of a young virgin woman is important within the
Incelosphere, as Foucault notes the theme of virginity in the framing of questions surrounding
44Some members disagreed with the statement, referring to the Albocel as a “volcel”. Meaning ‘voluntarily celibate’, there term is given to any incel who expresses preferences or, in most cases, requirements for what they want in a intimate partner. Essentially, if an incel turns down any opportunity for sex, they are a volcel and are choosing to be celibate, versus an incel who is not celibate by choice.
Williams 80 pleasure in Christian and modern cultures (229). Her virginity and “her redemptive power” are incredibly significant in this context, as the symbol of the young virgin woman represents the power to bring these individuals into the realm of manhood through a sexual relationship, thus redeeming them in the eyes of society as “men” (Foucault 230). The concept of women symbolizing and bringing about this redemption and transformation bears similarities with
George Gilder’s notion that it is women’s job to transform men with love (Thornhill and Palmer
261). In the eyes of incels, as they do not have proper access to the redeeming and transformative power of women, they cannot fully become men.
On the other side of this dichotomy, there is deep resentment and hatred towards women, who are viewed as manipulative creatures, driven by primitive biological urges to be hypergamous. They have no loyalty and only look out for themselves at the expense of everyone around them, especially incels. In a discussion thread titled If a woman doesn’t have sex with you, then she doesn’t like you at all, one man claims that friendships between men and women are not possible because women see men as “just a resource that can be disposed [of]” and that if women don’t see you as a sexual being, they don’t like you at all (Zielony4 November 8, 2017).
In response, another man claims that “If you weren’t blessed with good genetics, then you have nothing to offer to women, so they ignore you and insult you,” a belief that is prominent on
Incels.Co (21st century schizoid man November 8, 2017).
Within the Incelosphere, as in Western society as a whole, women’s appearance and choices will always be subject to criticism and scrutiny. One man describes all women as “literally a walking lie,” because they use make-up (commonly referred to as “fake-up” on Incels.Co) to
“hide their imperfections,” wear high heels and push up bras (PM_ME_STRIPPERS April 3,
2018). He goes on to describe women as “gold-digging, lookism influenced, hypergamous
Williams 81 attention seeking whores” (PM_ME_STRIPPERS April 3, 2018). This same man describes women as not having “the basic abilities to love or care” and as being “heartless creatures” in another discussion thread, crassly claiming,
So, what do femoid cunts really offer than their loose beef curtains? Misery, heartbreak,
agony, suffering, depression, suicidal thoughts, homicidal ideation, accumulative irritation,
anxiety, psychosis, schizophrenia, paranoia, retardation, erectile dysfunction, prostate cancer
and the lot. (PM_ME_STRIPPERS April 10, 2018)
To many of the men on Incels.Co, women are living life on “easy mode,” unable to grasp the struggles of gender stereotypes and expectations. In their eyes, women have no reason to be upset or depressed, and claims of feeling anxious or lonely are just cries for attention because there is no way that these feelings could be valid. It is this erroneous view that contributes to resentment and contempt towards women.
Incels’ dichotomous views of women are not unique to the Incelosphere, with much of the more deleterious views having their roots in the discourse of men’s movements of the past.
The concept of women being ‘manipulative’ is an example of this, as Messner makes note of the fact that the Men’s Liberation movement of the 1960s viewed women as being ‘manipulative’ as well (“The Limits of the ‘Male Sex Role’” 264). It is in this discourse of resenting and hating women that we see the emergence of a victim identity that many incels adopt, one that allows them to shift the onus for their perceived failures to perform masculinity onto women and a so- called feminist society. The influence and presence of MRM ideology, which claims that male privilege is a lie created by feminists and that feminism is a plot to cover up women’s power, is evident in assertions of incel victimhood (Messner, Politics of Masculinities 40; Clatterbaugh
888). This power conceals the fact that men, in the eyes of the MRM, are the real victims of
Williams 82 dating rituals, prostitution, and sexist media influenced gender constructs, something incels very much agree with (Messner, Politics of Masculinities 42).
Based on my study of online comments, I posit that both sides of the Madonna/Whore construct effectively operate to dehumanize women. With the Madonna, we have women not as humans but as goddesses, representing sexual purity and the rebirth of incels into men, but this is a standard that by its very definition, cannot be maintained. The cost of bringing these individuals into manhood is her virginity and, therefore, her status as the Madonna. She is an object that has served her purpose. The Whore represents the sexual gratification that many incels feel that they have been denied. This dehumanization of women is observed frequently in
Incels.Co discussions threads, typically manifesting in an aggressive manner, that leans more towards the construct of the Whore. One man asserts that they, as incels, have to “shatter” women’s “fairy tale world” by telling them “all they’re good for is spreading their legs and having children. No one gives a fuck about them becoming yoga instructors or social workers,” a statement that both dehumanizes and reinforces stereotypes of women having no individuality
(Robtical November 25, 2018). Another man claims that other incels will begin to understand women’s “hypergamous instincts, dumb intellects and lack of morality” when they realize that they are just “dumb, reproduction machine[s]” (Inbuddhist September 12, 2018). This dehumanization extends beyond conceptualizing women as merely a means for pleasure and procreation: one man claims that “foids” should “use numbers as names,” an unsettling thought that invokes images of the prison system. Another individual conjectures that the terms “femoid” and “foid” should no longer be used, as they refer to a “female humanoid”, because while a humanoid is not human, it appears to be. He suggests that calling women “bags of r***meat”
(clarified by another individual to mean “bags of rapemeat”), so “when men purchase a new
Williams 83 femoid, and later find that her hymen isn’t intact, they can look around and say, “Hey, who opened my bag of r***meat?!” (Leucosticte December 6, 2018). For another man, women “are toilets Like toilets, females are not people. Like toilets, females are not individuals: that is, they do not have lives, opinions, idiosyncrasies. Like toilets, the main function of females is a repository for certain bodily fluids” (Insomniac May 8, 2019). Comments frequently presented women as commodities, sources of potential pleasure or pain, rather than as individual and fully realized human beings.
Women can never be the victim in the Incel narratives studied, whether this is being oppressed through patriarchal gender relations and gender stereotypes or acts of gendered violence. One discussion thread that exemplifies this asserts that if a woman cheats on her boyfriend, then she is to blame because “She is a whore. Enough said.” However, if she cheated on by her boyfriend, it is still her fault because she can “choose to go for asshole Chad instead of a nice but ugly guy who respects her and is faithful” and is therefore “still a whore”
(Monogamist December 4, 2018). It is crucial that women never be positioned as the victim, as it would undermine the narrative of women as responsible for everything from individual struggles to broader societal issues. The culmination of the dehumanization and blaming of women is the violent discourse that is directed at and targets women.
Masculinity and Violence in the Incelosphere
There is a reoccurring theme in mainstream discussions regarding Incel: the potential for real-world violence. The Toronto Van Attack in 2018 brought Incel into the public consciousness, and the ensuing discussions focused predominantly on Incel and violence. This was seen again in May 2020 when a machete attack that took place at a massage parlour in North
York on February 24, 2020, during which one woman was killed, and two people were seriously
Williams 84 injured, was declared an act of Incel terrorism. In conversations on men and acts of violence, there is a pattern of positioning violence as a direct result of mental illness. While there are certainly some valid connections between mental illness and violence, I believe that linking the two in the context of Incel overlooks the concept of violence as a means to reclaim masculinity as well as the realities of mental health within Incel that do not involve acts of violence.
Therefore, I have intentionally separated violence and mental health as two distinct categories as a means analyze each more fully and to move away from the ‘lone wolf’ and ‘unspecified mental illness’ tropes that are so often the case when an individual (white) man commits an act of violence.45
Violence is a normalized aspect of Incels.Co, a fact most evident in the language that is used online; many individuals will use ever more graphic language for the apparent purposes of obtaining shock value and to fully express the depths of the writer's emotions. Instead of specific real-world threats and the planning of offline action, this violence can be understood as expressions of frustration and anger contained within that online space. This does not make these comments any less disturbing or concerning, nor does it completely negate the potential for real- world violence stemming from this virtual community. Much of this violence is explicitly focused on women, highlighting the very gendered nature of the violence within the
Incelosphere. These types of discussion threads can range from threads such as [Serious] Women need equality where the OP writes, “Women need both sides of their faces equally covered with bruises not just one black eye. Whores are right about equality. *wink face emoji*”
(Angryatsociety February 12, 2019) to ones such as [Based] the place of women is not in the
45 The tropes are, generally speaking, the exclusive domain of white men, with men of colour more likely to be subjected to racist tropes that deny entirely any connections between mental illness and acts of violence.
Williams 85 kitchen….46 In this thread the OP goes on to say that “her place is being cutted [sic] in multiple pieces and having them being stored on the freezer for later use” (GameDevCel March 25,
2019).
Perhaps the most troubling normalization and positive reinforcement of violence is the existence of “incel saints.”47 These so-called saints are men who committed an act of violence, typically against women, but in some cases against the “normies” in general. The Isla Vista shooter is perhaps the most well known of these Incel saints, though his status as a ‘saint,’ and even as a true incel (or “trucel”), is a subject of debate. Considered by many to be the original incel who marked the beginning of the “incel rebellion,” the Isla Vista shooter has had a lasting influence on the Incelosphere. His initials, ER, have been turned into a verb, with posts claiming that they want to go “ER” (commit an act of mass violence), or inserting the initials into a phrase, such as “we need a new hERo”. The most recent incel saint, the accused perpetrator of the Toronto Van Attack, is also subject to a similar debate about whether he is a “trucel” or not.
With the Toronto Van Attack, the reasons are slightly different, as there are numerous conspiracy theories that speculate how the attacker was merely a patsy. Responding to the post OPCatalyst claims Alek Minassian was a patsy for a deep state operation RCMP CSIS, the user Emergency
Manual claims that “they want to frame us so they can bring down our community” (Weston404
February 12, 2019).
Identifying as an incel is not a requirement to become an Incel saint, as seen in the case of Marc Lépine, the man responsible for the École Polytechnique Massacre on December 6, 1989
46 This type of thread, with a purposely misleading title, are common on Incels.Co and go both ways. Potential reasons include getting higher views from fellow incels and being keenly aware of outsiders, or “lurkers”, who go on this forum. 47 There are numerous Incel saints – George Sodini and Seung-Hui Cho, for example. The three discussed here are the most frequently mentioned and arguably the most influential within the Incelosphere.
Williams 86 which left fourteen women dead and a nation in shock.48 In analyzed discussion threads, his status as an Incel saint was unquestioned, unlike the two previously mentioned Incel saints.
While never self-identifying as an incel in such language, the École Polytechnique shooter never had a girlfriend despite wanting one, a relatable circumstance to incels (Pelletier “30 years since the Montreal Massacre”). He explicitly stated that his motivation for this violence was to kill feminists, whom he believed to be responsible for ruining his life, claiming that women want to keep all the advantages of women but also take those of men, a claim that is also prevalent in
Incel discourse (Pelletier “30 years since the Montreal Massacre”). In his suicide note, the École
Polytechnique shooter asserts his belief that he is not “crazy,” that his fight against feminism is rational, an assertion that aligns with a push within Incel to defend their views as logical and rational (Pelletier “30 years since the Montreal Massacre”).
The fact that all these Incel saints achieved their ‘sainthood’ by planning and carrying out acts of violence, resulting in the mass murder of women and so-called ‘normies’ speaks volumes about the conceptualization of violence within Incels.Co. Each of these individuals, these
‘saints,’ are seen to have reclaimed their masculinity through enacting violence on those whom they believe to be responsible for stifling it, namely women. This ‘hero-worship’ occurs outside of Incel as well, as one young man explains to Kimmel, “I am calling him [George Sodini] a hero for being a symbol for the consequences of denying men sex, not for killing those women” (qtd. in Kimmel, Angry White Men 172). This kind of violence, Kimmel asserts, is retaliatory and restorative, “part of a gendered equation. Violence is but the means; the end is the restoration of honor and respect, the ability to rectify humiliation” (Angry White Men 179). Smiler makes a
48Out of the fourteen people injured, ten were women and with his suicide note was a hit-list with the names of nineteen women he described as “radical feminists”. Lépine died by suicide before police entered the building. (Bindel “The Montreal Massacre”).
Williams 87 similar assertion, noting that “violence was ritualized and used to settle disputes,” the dispute in this context founded in aggrieved entitlement and the need to reassert one’s masculinity (23).
Rejecting attempts to justify male aggression and violence by linking it to testosterone and biology, hooks states that “the will to use violence is really not linked to biology but to a set of expectations about the nature of power in a dominator culture” (55).
Masculinity is a performance, one where other men are both the main audience and the judges (Kimmel, “Masculinity as Homophobia” 128; Manhood in America 247). The use of violence then becomes a tool to reassert oneself as masculine when this performance is threatened or fails to meet the expectations of its audience, reflecting Kimmel’s observation that violence serves as a way for manhood to be publicly recognized (Angry White Men 178). For incels, violence can have an added meaning, as Kimmel posits that violence “is often the single most evident marker of manhood” which can be expressed through a “willingness to fight, the desire to fight” (“Masculinity as Homophobia” 132). The context of this data, an online homosocial environment, is important to keep at the forefront: Kimmel notes in the case of men’s online chatrooms that they became “increasingly violent because of an element of homosocial competition, a competition among the guys” (“Masculinity as Homophobia” 115). In the discussion threads studied here, it was observed that men on Incels.Co who disagree with violence are often referred to as ‘cucks,’ indicating that there is an element of homosocial competition that influences violence and the performance of masculinities. Therefore, violent discourse within Incels.Co is a means by which to reclaim and publicly perform masculinity, even within the vacuum of the Incelosphere.
Among the most frequently mentioned forms of violence on Incels.Co are rape and sexual assault. What is disturbing about these discussions is how rape and sexual assault are
Williams 88 imagined: as something that only happens when a woman rejects having consensual sex with a man, especially one who is not physically attractive, and that women cannot be raped because the vagina is ‘designed’ to be penetrated. In a discussion thread on the subject, one man sums up this view by stating, “men and women think of two very different concepts when they talk about rape. Foids talk about rape and mean having unpleasant sex, men talk about rape and mean being violated,” a statement riddled with aggrieved entitlement, misogyny and the need to reinforce men’s, specifically incels, status as victims (Mr.Sophistication November 29, 2019). Some men on Incels.Co even state that they want to be sexually assaulted or raped, because to them, this is not an act of violence, nor is it about gender or power: it is about sex. In a discussion thread
[SuicideFuel] Why Can’t A Female Sexually Assault Me? one man alleges that “It’s natural for us to want to be raped by a woman” because it would mean that she felt some sort of sexual attraction to him (Of Manlets and Men March 9, 2019).
There is some acknowledgement that men also experience sexual violence, although it is not usually sympathetic49. In a discussion thread titled [RageFuel] - I can't show sympathy for men who had been raped by women. At least you're not an Incel, which includes a link with men sharing their stories of sexual violence. Some express contempt for these men; “Imagine having free sex but still complaining about it” (Cuyen March 3, 2019). Others express jealousy, such as one man who acknowledges that he has just read the story of a man who was raped by a woman and then states, “I’m so extremely jealous. Intense bondage play with a girl who wasn’t even ugly (it was his girlfriend)” (SirIncel March 3, 2019). Furthermore, the concept of rape is taken and applied to issues that incels feel negatively affect men, one example being “divorce rape” (a
49 In the analyzed discussion threads when men’s experiences of sexual violence are brought up it is women who are the perpetrators of this violence, reinforcing the heteronormativity of this online space.
Williams 89 woman divorcing a man, potentially taking children and assets). In a discussion thread titled
Provocatively dressed women = sexual harassment, one man goes as far as to say he feels that he has been “emotionally raped” by “having to look at exposed JB all day whilst they despise me”
(Anonymous MG June 1, 2018).
To many of the men in these online spaces, any violence against women has been provoked by women, either directly or indirectly. News articles about acts of violence against women, ranging from assault to brutal murder, are frequently shared, and the response one of vindication, that women are getting what they deserve. A recurring argument is that women are more attracted to violent men, either due to biology or a lack of rational thought. This
“encourages” men to be violent, as one individual claims, “Women are partially responsible for most violent crimes committed by men” (V S T May 16, 2018). There is also a narrative that women, through how they act and dress, provoke men’s violence against them, and as a result, men cannot be held responsible. This has been and continues to be a dominant narrative in
Western society, as William Muehl, a retired professor at Yale Divinity School, claims, “The way young women dress in the spring constitutes a sexual assault upon every male within eyesight of them” (qtd. in Kimmel, Angry White Men 118). Beneke observes that terms such as
‘stunning’, ‘striking’ and ‘provocative beauty’ describe women’s physical appearance as something provocative and dangerous, that her looks are a weapon used against men. In the case of rape, then, if the woman is “judged attractive by men, and particularly if she dresses to look attractive, then the mentality exists that she attacked him with her weapon so, of course he counter-attacked with his” (Beneke 374). Men’s violence towards women is either deemed to be a response to this initial violence, essentially a case of self-defence, or advocated for as something that women deserve for not staying in their (gendered) lane. In both narratives, the
Williams 90 woman is cast as responsible for this violence, either by provocation or deviation, and therefore cannot be a victim. Men’s sexual violence against women, particularly rape, is positioned as natural, with the laws of nature being used as an argument for men’s reclaiming of their sexual
“rights,” with the blame consequently placed on women (Beneke 373; Robinson 156). Warren
Farrell argues that rape is not a crime of violence but is about sex and sexual frustration, insinuating that rape is women’s fault because they were not sexually available enough and dared to go into the public sphere alone (qtd in Kimmel, Angry White Men 119). What each of these narratives does is remove men’s responsibility for their actions and shift the onus onto women, which actively prevents women from being the victims of men’s violence since they bear the responsibility for it.
The Incelosphere has become intrinsically linked with violence through the violent actions of two men. While threats of real-world violence cannot be ignored, what is most dangerous about this online space are the narratives of victim-blaming and naturalizing of men’s violence against women contained therein. These narratives pre-date and exist outside of the
Incelosphere; however, the echo chamber effect of this space presents increased potential for radicalization and offline violence. The discourse on violence is also used to propagate and legitimate incels’ claims that THEY, as men and as incels, are the real victims, not women.
Statistics show that women, transgender persons (especially trans women) and non-binary persons50 are more likely to experience sexual violence at the hands of men. A 2019 survey conducted by the National Sexual Violence Resource Center on Sexual Violence and
Transgender/Non-Binary communities in the United States found that 47 percent of respondents
50 It is important when looking at such statistics to keep intersectionality in mind: race, disability, socio-economic status, and other social categories all have an impact on these statistics, with marginalized communities being more likely to experience sexual violence.
Williams 91 had been sexually assaulted.51 The Assaulted Women’s Helpline reports that over half of
Canadian women have experienced one or more incidents of physical or sexual violence since the age of sixteen. These facts contradict the narrative that men are the victims of a society that elevates women at the expense of men. To counteract this, these acts of violence against women must be justified, which is done by placing the responsibility on women for men’s behaviour and by employing a narrative of men’s self-defence against women’s ‘assault.’ These attempts to justify violence are a manifestation of aggrieved entitlement, which Kimmel argues, “justifies revenge against those who have wronged you; it is compensation for humiliation” (Angry White
Men 75).
Masculinity, Mental Health and Self Esteem
There has been a push in recent years to challenge and move away from the stoic and emotionally suppressed stereotypes of masculinity and allow men to open up emotionally.
Initiatives such as Movember and Heads Up Guys focus on breaking with the masculine expectation of emotional repression and making space for men to discuss their mental health and reach out for help. This social shift is apparent in the Incelosphere: an increasing number of men are openly critiquing and challenging the rigid expectations on how they emotionally express themselves as men. At the same time, how these men view themselves in relation to hegemonic masculinity and masculine stereotypes is quite harmful, internalizing a message that they have failed completely to meet the idealized standards of manhood. While this study is not a psychological analysis and makes no attempt to be one, the inclusion of mental health and self- esteem was of vast importance to this research. To analyze the views and actions of these men
51 The numbers increased dramatically for groups that are marginalized such as Indigenous persons, those who experience homelessness or those who do sex work.
Williams 92 without taking mental health and self-esteem into consideration would lessen the impact of this research and fail to convey the complexities and nuances of this community.
For many of the men on Incels.Co, their relationship with self-esteem and mental health appears to be heavily influenced by, if not entirely dependent upon, how they position themselves in relation to hegemonic masculinity. The violation of gender stereotypes can lead to social condemnation and consequences in Western society, with men experiencing this to a higher degree than women (Tremblay and L’Heureux 20). In their work on the construction of male identity, Gilles Tremblay and Pierre L’Heureux observe that men “who do not meet these standards of ‘masculinity’ are encouraged to see themselves as inferior and feel devalued” (21).
This is embodied by the men of Incels.Co, who frequently refer to themselves as “ugly” and as being “subhuman.” For one person to call another ugly or a subhuman is not interpreted as an insult, but simply stating a fact of life. Threads with titles such as Accept that you’re subhuman garbage are not out of the ordinary, nor are comments such as “Stop coping and just accept your lives as subhumans” (Pareg June 13, 2019). In response to the thread, We are not exactly men, one man writes that “We’re not exactly human either. We’re subhuman,” indicating a sense of inferiority and lack of self-worth (Rice Cel October 23, 2018).
A large part of Incelosphere terminology, ideology and general discourse relates to physical appearance. A significant amount of time is devoted to debating whether one’s height or facial features are more important, the importance of having a strong jawline, and even the impact neck width can have. There is an incredible emphasis placed on these features, as one individual claims that one’s jawline is “essential to your facial appearance and can make or break your relationship situation” (Anonymous MG May 31, 2018). There are two primary reasons for this fixation: physical appearance is often held as the defining factor of potential social and
Williams 93 romantic success, and it is the primary way men are judged to be masculine or not. For incels, physical appearance takes on tremendous significance, as many claim that “masculinity = your looks” (mylifeistrash May 22, 2019). Statements such as this reveal just how deeply ingrained societal pressures regarding physical appearance are in the rhetoric of Incel and the minds of individual incels.
Western social norms are having a negative influence on men’s body image, Amanda
Baker and Céline Blanchard assert, and this phenomenon is not new. A Psychology Today study, published in 1997, reported that 43 percent of men were “dissatisfied with [their] appearance”, a sharp increase from the 15 percent reported in 1972 (Kimmel, Manhood in America 247). Baker and Blanchard connect men’s body dissatisfaction with depression, anxiety (both social anxiety and anxiety about their appearance), and lower self-confidence (104). They also make a connection between men’s body dissatisfaction with “increased loneliness, over-investment in self-appearance […], increased motivation or drive for muscularity, and greater distorted body perceptions” (104). It is also noted that such men are “increasingly likely” to modify their appearance through plastic surgery (108). The adverse effects raised by Baker and Blanchard bear the hallmark of the Incelosphere while also indicating that some of the defining aspects of
Incel are common outside of this space. Their work also emphasizes the connection between body dissatisfaction and mental health.
Mental health is solely a men’s issue on Incels.Co; society, in their view, caters to women and allows them to live life on ‘easy mode’, so for a woman to experience issues such as depression or anxiety, is considered absurd. A woman who claims she has or is experiencing mental illness or a decline in her mental health is seen as women trying to make everything about themselves, playing the victim. Women “absolutely love playing the victim” a man using the
Williams 94 screenname michael2222 vehemently claims, asserting that women have taken a men’s issue,
Incel, and made it about themselves (through the creation of femcels52) because “they feel the need to be victimized by absolutely everything” (November 12, 2019). Threads asking if or when other incels are planning suicide, commonly referred to as “roping”, and polls on how many
Incels.Co members have attempted suicide are the most common and direct way mental health is discussed on this forum. Threads sharing experiences with psychologists or psychiatrists and asking questions about medications such as anti-depressants were also observed, however there is a general rejection for mental health professionals as being “bluepilled.” Those who admit to seeing a mental health professional are often told that they have wasted their money, since
“therapy will do nothing” for an incel, one man argues. He claims that because an incel will not have companionship and love, described as “[t]wo of the main parts of human life”, nothing will
“make your life bearable other than suicide” (Wasteland January 14, 2019).
In these discussion threads there is a mix of nihilism, misogyny, and apathy, but also genuine expressions of pain and distress. There are several threads where men report having engaged in various acts of self-harm. One individual describes himself as “a worthless sack of garbage” who does not just experience sad moments but is chronically depressed, his sense of obligation to his family being his reason for not acting on his suicidal ideation (TomathonClancy
July 1, 2018). A man who goes by the screenname anon1822 explains how he wallows in his
“crippling depression in solitude” while actively avoiding things that will potentially trigger a sad emotional response (January 19, 2019). There are some who do not blame anyone, including women, for their pain, such as TomathonClancy, who says that he does not hate women or
52 A femcel is a female involuntarily celibate, their online presence is primarily on Reddit forums. The concept of femcels is wholly rejected by incels.
Williams 95
Chads, and not to “blame the messager for what he or she’s trying to deliver” (July 1, 2018).
Others have a very different perspective: in a threat titled Woman Are Mind Raping Us Right
Now, universallyabhorred claims that women have caused incels “numerous psychiatric disorders, including depression, PTSD, anxiety, suicidal ideation, homicidal ideation and more due to the psychological trauma they have inflicted upon us” (July 3, 2019). Women have done this, he alleges, by “denying us [incels] access to their holes, treating us like subhuman garbage, and refusing to give us female comfort, validation and attention” (universallyabhorred July 3,
2019). The responsibility and subsequent blame for men’s, especially incels’, mental health and wellbeing are placed on women, continuing a pattern of holding women responsible for the feelings and actions of men. This is most evident in discussions on suicide, as threads titled
[Serious][Theory] Most men commit suicide because of women and [News] Women are causing an increased suicide rate in men53 not only place women as the cause of men’s poor mental health, but also suggests that they are actively causing the men’s suicides. Statistics support incels claim that men are more likely than women to die by suicide. In both the United States and
Canada, men are approximately three times more likely to die by suicide than women54 (“Suicide
Statistics”; Suicide in Canada: Key statistics). The reason for this, however, is not women indirectly and directly pushing men to suicide, as is so often claimed on Incels.Co. While there are numerous reasons and individual stories behind these statistics, an overarching theme that emerges is that men have not been socialized to talk about their emotions (Milne et al.). The
53 This thread is about the article “America’s rising suicide rate” (The Economist) and creates a false connection between the points that suicide rates in general have increased by 25 percent between 1999 and 2016, and that the suicide rate for men remains about four times higher than that of women. The article also suggests that women entering the work-force relates to the increased suicide rate for men. 54 Canadian data indicate that while men are at a higher risk of suicide, women have a higher rate of non-lethal self- harm, challenging incels’ belief that mental health only effects men (Public Health Agency of Canada).
Williams 96 expression “take it like a man” becomes even more dangerous when it comes to mental health, as fear of appearing weak and vulnerable keeps many men from reaching out for help (Milne et al.).
In a space that is rife with misogyny, nihilism and homosocial competition, an unexpected element of peer support was observed. Several men on Incels.Co shared experiences of trauma, ranging from bullying to molestation and assault, as well as personal tragedies, such as losing a parent or relative. While not all the comments were supportive, there was genuine concern and support expressed. These types of threads and comments are essential as they allow us on the outside to see the humanity of the individuals who comprise this community. There are sincere attempts by some to create a supportive environment, as is the case with a man using the screenname takERisks, who asks those struggling to “Remember we’re always here for you. We joke around but try and stay positive, appreciate the good things and ignore dickheads”
(November 8, 2018). The ability for Incels.Co and the Incelosphere to be a radicalizing space is definitive, but it is also important to acknowledge that for some men, this is a space where they can express themselves. In response to a comment asking him if this forum is having an impact on his mindset, TomathanClancy, who had originally posted about increasing suicidal ideation and a feeling of being on a “downward spiral,” explains that “No this is the only place I can vent properly and cool down” (October 21, 2018). Some of the grievances brought forth by the men of Incel, such as higher suicide rates in men, are shown to have validity and be based on statistical facts. Others, such as the claim that women are the cause of men’s mental health struggles, appear to be based in misogyny.
Williams 97
Chapter 7: Conclusion
This study found that Incel is an online community that is defined by contradiction and paradox. A product of twenty-first century media and communication technology, Incel is also profoundly influenced by men’s liberation in the 1960s/1970s and the men’s rights movements that followed. The men’s liberation movement critiqued male sex roles without consideration of power or privilege, substituting the personal for the political and the assertion that male gender roles were more restrictive than those placed on women (Robinson 131). Core concepts such as gender symmetry and equal oppression further depoliticized gender relations and oppression and allowed the men’s liberation movement to explore masculinity without recognizing male institutional privilege (Messner, Politics of Masculinities 41). The men’s liberation movement is also the origins of a victim complex based on the belief that the gender role expectations for men are far more restricting than those for women, one that still exists within Incel today (Baker and
Bakker 547). I propose these views lived on through the next generation of men’s movements and, combined with the twenty-first century ideologies of the Red and the Black Pills, culminated in the rhetoric of Incel.
My study further reveals that while the origins and context of Incel remain firmly located in the West, through the global reach of the Internet, it includes members from around the world.
The data revealed that the narrative of Incel as a group of angry and entitled white men not only is disproved; rather, it a space occupied by a diverse group of men with a range of life experiences. There are, however, still tensions and a racial hierarchy that positions whiteness as dominant within Incel. Further, gender and sexuality are understood in the context of heteronormativity within the Incelosphere. There are men who come to forums such as Incels.Co looking for a space where other men are struggling with relationships and the concept of
Williams 98 masculinity. Men of different races and ethnicities come into this space looking for support and like-minded people, only to become part of an echo chamber of misogyny, despair and rage.
My research indicates that the narrative that Incel is a community of men who are just angry with women due to their lack of success in intimate relationships, and who are inherently misogynist, is an oversimplification. The Incel community is a labyrinth of issues and challenges regarding the conceptualization and performance of masculinities and gender relations in the
West. Hegemonic masculinity is the basis by which the men of Incel define how successful their performance of masculinity is. The consequences for failing to meet this standard are feelings of devaluation and inferiority, epitomized in the use of the term “subhuman” to describe themselves and each other (Tremblay and L’Heureux 21). While hegemonic masculinity is held as the standard by which to judge oneself and others, incels also critique and challenge this narrow construct of masculinity. The expectation that men will be stoic and emotionally repressed is one of the most frequently challenged aspects of hegemonic masculinity in Incels.Co. The concept that “men become,” that manhood must be achieved or earned, is the most significant source of contention. This is because, for Incels, a standard of physical attractiveness must be met to be seen as a man or to have a relationship with a woman; therefore, they are unable to fully become men and be recognized as such in society. Male privilege is negated by the adoption and defence of a victim identity, aided by the performance of geek and hybrid masculinities. This distances incels from hegemonic masculinity and, by also creating distance between power and privilege, creates space for them to assert a victim identity and position women and feminism as the cause of their victimization.
The discussion threads studied illustrate the deep resentment towards women, whom many incels believe to be living life on “easy mode” in a society that favours women. However,
Williams 99 a closer reading reveals more incels occupy a grey area in terms of how they view women, rather than in strictly binary terms. This grey area includes the Madonna/Whore dichotomy, where women are desired but also vilified as the cause of incels’ pain. This dichotomy actively dehumanizes women: as the Madonna, women’s transforming and redeeming power, through which incels’ can become men, elevates them above humanity to a divine plane. At the same time, women, driven by primal biological urges, are depicted as lacking rational thought and compassion, characteristics that are stereotypically designated as part of the masculine. In both cases, women are reduced to their bodies and their ability to either confer or deny pleasure to men.
Theories such as women’s hypergamy are used to support the claim that men, especially incels, have been and continue to be victimized by women. Women’s hypergamy is considered to be biologically occurring, something that cannot be changed and that women refuse to control, and therefore patriarchal authority was needed to maintain control of women. The societal, political, and cultural changes brought about by Second-Wave Feminism, and the Sexual
Revolution in the 1960s were identified as the root cause of women’s hypergamy today in the eyes of incels, as they disrupted the ‘natural’ patriarchal authority in society. These claims are not new; the MRM also propagates similar claims about feminism disrupting the “natural [read patriarchal] order” (Thornhill and Palmer 260; Blais and Dupuis-Déri 24). In both the MRM and
Incel, these claims are used to reinforce the narrative that men are victims of women and feminism. Because society is now ‘corrupted’ by feminism, incels claim, it is impossible for women to be the victims, feeding into their own victim complex and creating a sense of justified anger and resentment towards women.
Williams 100
My research finds the violent rhetoric of Incels.Co stems from these feelings of anger and resentment, bolstered by aggrieved entitlement and reinforced by the echo chamber that is the
Incelosphere. The potential for Incel inspired real-world violence is real and cannot be ignored; however, I propose it is the everyday violence of the Incelosphere that takes the forms of misogyny, racism and homophobia, that deserves more considerable attention. This discourse has become normalized and, in a homosocial environment with homosocial competition, can become increasingly extreme. While this in itself may not directly result in real-world violence, it can be the catalyst for it. The dehumanization of women and scapegoating of women for the problems of incels makes online and offline violence easier, while aggrieved entitlement gives a sense of justification for it. The heralding of so-called Incel saints glorifies violence against women as an act of righteous retribution and exemplifies the use of aggrieved entitlement as justification for such violence. How violence against women is conceptualized by incels is especially concerning: to maintain the narrative that men, specifically incels, are the victims of women and feminism, women can never be viewed as the victim. Rape, for example, is turned into a case of women regretting consensual sex, while the term ‘rape’ is taken and applied to ways incels believe women hurt men, such as “divorce rape.”
Because of the violence that has become synonymous with Incel, there is a tendency to make a sweeping generalization that the men of Incel must be mentally ill in some form or another. These vague claims fail to shine a light on the complex relationship incels have with mental health and self-esteem. The belief that they have failed in their performance of masculinity, or that society views them as having failed, has detrimental impacts. The consequences for failing to meet the standard of hegemonic masculinity are a devaluing of one’s self, as less of a man, as inferior. This specific consequence has become woven into the identity
Williams 101 of Incel, as incels will refer to themselves and each other as “subhuman,” which is then internalized. In our society, even with recent shifts towards body positivity and inclusiveness, there is still a pressure to always look your best, to achieve and maintain a particular physique, to hide your flaws through makeup or filters. The comments on Incels.Co reveal how this pressure becomes an obsession; everything is a potentially fatal flaw, from wrist size to lip shape.
Not every man who is a member of Incel experiences a mental illness or a mental health crisis, but this study indicates there are many who do. There is a disconcertingly high volume of discussion threads asking members if they have or will attempt suicide, in addition to the suicidal ideation expressed in other threads and comments. Despair and loneliness are expressed by many and, by some, are understood to be part of the process of fully accepting the Black Pill: giving up hope of love and relationships, embracing that the life of an incel is one of misery until this hope is extinguished. Distrust of mental health professionals, namely psychologists and psychiatrists, is prevalent and seeking help from any mental health professional, but especially one who is a woman, is generally discouraged. Some men on Incels.Co report that they have had positive interactions with mental health professionals, but the more general theme is that these encounters have been negative and non-productive. There are genuine mental health struggles and very real pain described in the Incelosphere. Believing themselves to be outsiders and feeling misunderstood, Incels.Co and other spaces in the Incelosphere become spaces of support for many of these men.
The aim of this research is to present a nuanced analysis of Incel, a community that is often described as a one-dimensional embodiment of misogyny. The views put forth in this analysis represent dominant or recurring themes; they are not universal, and there are individuals who challenge and refute the views included in this analysis. Throughout this research process,
Williams 102 numerous potential avenues of inquiry came to light that were beyond the scope of this research, such as how religion and politics influence and operate within the Incelosphere. Each of the main themes included in this analysis, pseudo-science; sexuality; race; masculinities; women, especially how views on women are shaped and influenced by race and racist stereotypes; violence; and mental health and self-esteem, should be considered for more in-depth research and analysis. The theme of relationships, romantic and sexual, was a recurring topic on
Incels.Co, and one that offers further insight into this community. An interesting observation was that men would post misogynist comments, but simultaneously express a real desire for a genuine connection and for a loving, romantic relationship. Friendships, relationships with family and with peers are also potential sources of further inquiry. The prominence of anti- abortion rhetoric on Incels.Co, while beyond this scope of this research, should also be considered in future studies. An analysis of the screennames of these individuals and an overall discourse analysis are also potential areas of additional research.
This research was as enlightening as it was challenging. From this research, three principal findings emerged. The first is that there is no one homogenous Incel community where members come together united in their anger; rather, it is a space defined by contradiction and paradox. The second is that Incel is not an aberration but rather a concentration of the misogyny that continues to be prevalent in Western society today. The misogynistic rhetoric that is dominant in the Incelosphere is also evident on popular social media platforms like Instagram and Facebook. Social media posts and comments that claim women blame and vilify men, and that men’s problems are not being acknowledged espouse views comparable to those found on
Incels.Co. The belief that society favours women and that women have more advantages than men is well documented outside of the Incelosphere.
Williams 103
The third major finding of this research is that Incel is just part of a much larger problem regarding contemporary Western masculinities. Beginning with men’s liberationists depoliticizing of gender issues in the 1960s, anti-feminist men’s movements and their conversations on masculinities of the twentieth century were mostly devoid of recognition of power or privilege. The impact of this continue to be visible and to shape gender relations today.
Critiques of men’s behaviour and violence against women are still taken as personal attacks and countered with failures to acknowledge men’s issues. Phrases such as “Not All Men”55 epitomize how men continue to distance themselves from institutionalized power and privilege.
The members of Incels.Co present a critique of the narrow expectations of hegemonic masculinity and represents some of the challenges faced by men as they try to adhere to this limiting construct. The consequences for failing to successfully perform gender roles can be damaging for men who believe that if they fail to perform masculinity, they risk feminization, the ultimate failure in a society that devalues femininity. The expectations of hegemonic masculinity stifle men’s emotional lives, and men’s mental health remains an often- underreported issue. While there are valid points brought up in these critiques, these are overshadowed by the misogyny that dominants Incels.Co. Carol Hanish warned of an “anti- woman, anti-women’s liberation” propensity in the men’s liberation, and decades later that anti- woman and anti-women’s liberation, or anti-feminist, rhetoric continues to be prevalent in contemporary MRMs and, now, within Incel (Messner, “The Limits of ‘The Male Sex Role’”
264). Pseudo-science is used to give legitimacy to these claims and defend against any perceived threat to incels’ claims of victimhood at the hands of women. The legacy of misogyny, aggrieved
55 The phrase “Not All Men” began as a hashtag on Twitter, used to counter feminist claims and critiques of men’s behaviour. The use of #NotAllMen became more widespread following the Isla Vista attack in 2014.
Williams 104 entitlement and victim complex carries on among incels, whose own narrow views of gender and sexuality trap them in the role of perpetual victim, with women and feminism always to blame.
Williams 105
Glossary
Ascend – To enter into a romantic/sexual relationship with a woman and ‘ascend’ out of inceldom. AWALT – An acronym for “All Women Are Like That.” Reinforces the assumption that women are driven by biological urges and operate with a hive mentality. Betabux – This cope involves making working to be financially successful in the hopes that having financial wealth will become a way to attract women and ultimately ascend out of inceldom. Cope – A coping mechanism for dealing with inceldom. Some copes have to do with trying to improve physical appearance in hopes of attracting women’s attention, such as betabuxxing, where the goal is to ascend out of inceldom. Others are denial copes, which do not necessarily work towards a goal of ascension but prevent the full acceptance of the Black Pill. Examples: Looksmaxxing, Gymcelling, Betabuxxing ER – The initials of Elliot Rodger. They are frequently used in the Incelosphere, capitalized in seemingly unrelated words to convey a specific point. They are also used as a way to express anger and frustration or to describe an act of, typically gendered, violence. Examples: I’m going to go ER; We need a hERo Femoid – A dehumanizing term commonly used when referring to women. A portmanteau of ‘female’ and ‘humanoid,’ this term implies that women resemble humans but are not actually being human beings. Related term: Foid Gymcel – An incel who attempts to improve his physical appearance through weight-lifting and physical exercise. Gymcelling is considered to be a cope. Landwhale – A dehumanizing term specifically referencing women who are viewed as fat or obese, comparing these women to whales. LDAR – An acronym for “Lay Down and Rot.” A nihilist phrase that describes a mentality that there is working towards a goal or to improve is pointless that there is nothing left to do but ‘lay down and rot.’ Lookism – Judging a person’s personal qualities based on their physical appearance, with physical attractiveness and beauty being associated with positive qualities and traits.
Williams 106
Looksmatch – The concept of finding a woman whose physical appearance is equal to your own. Men are believed to be willing to settle, but women are not and, therefore, finding one’s looksmatch is challenging. Manlet – A man who considers himself short, though what measurement is considered to be short, appears to be subjective. Maxx – Short for “maximize” this suffix is typically used at the end of a cope. Example: Looksmaxx – trying to maximize physical appearance Misandry – Prejudice against men. Mog/Mogged – to be dominated by another person. It can be used on its own or as a suffix. Example: Heightmogged – someone who is taller Neet – An acronym for “Not in Education, Employment or Training,” someone who is not working or going to school. Noodlewhore – A dehumanizing term for an East Asian woman based on highly racialized stereotypes. Normie – Someone who is not an incel, an average person who has not taken the Red or Black Pill. Norwood – Refers to balding and hair loss, based on the Hamilton-Norwood scale. Balding is considered to be a serious issue, with claims that men suffer greatly from balding, some going as far as to assert that balding is worse than being raped repeatedly. Pills – In addition to the primary Blue, Red and Black Pills, there are a variety of pills dependent on current theories or trends within the forums. Examples: Dog Pill (stemming from an article that claimed women slept better next to a dog than another person), Meeks Pill (based on Jeremy Meeks, whose mugshot became a viral sensation and earned him the moniker “hot felon”). Roastie – A woman with sexual experience; the term is a reference to the labia becoming like roast beef from ‘overuse.’ Rope – Refers to suicide, implying suicide by hanging. Example: Did he rope?; I am roping SMV – An acronym for Sexual Market/Marketplace Value. Ones SMV is based on a scale of one to ten, taking into consideration physical appearance, financial and social status, etc. Subhuman – A person who is physically unattractive. Used by many incels to describe themselves, this term can also be used to describe a specific feature.
Williams 107
Bibliography
Allan, Jonathan A. “Phallic Affect, or Why Mens Rights Activists Have Feelings.” Men and Masculinities, vol. 19, no. 1, 9 Mar. 2015, pp. 22–41., doi:10.1177/1097184x15574338.
Baker, Amanda, and Céline Blanchard. “Men’s Body Image: The Effects of an Unhealthy Body Image on Psychological, Behavioral, and Cognitive Health” Weight Loss, edited by Ignacio Jáuregui Lobera, IntechOpen, 2018, pp.101-120
Baker, Maureen, and J. I. Hans Bakker. “The Double-Bind of the Middle Class Male: Men’s Liberation and the Male Sex Role.” Journal of Comparative Family Studies, vol. 11, no. 4, 1980, pp. 547–561., doi:10.3138/jcfs.11.4.547.
Beneke, Timothy. “Deep Masculinity as a Social Construct: Foucault, Bly, and Masculinity.” The Politics of Manhood: Profeminist Men Respond to the Mythopoetic Men's Movement (And the Mythopoetic Leaders Answer), edited by Michael Kimmel, Temple University Press, 1995, pp. 151–163.
Bindel, Julie. “The Montreal Massacre: Canada's Feminists Remember.” The Guardian, 3 Dec. 2012, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/dec/03/montreal-massacre-canadas-feminists- remember.
Blais, Melissa, and Francis Dupuis-Déri. “Masculinism and the Antifeminist Countermovement.” Social Movement Studies, vol. 11, no. 1, 19 Dec. 2011, pp. 21–39., doi:10.1080/14742837.2012.640532.
Bridges, Tristan, and C. J. Pascoe. “Hybrid Masculinities: New Directions in the Sociology of Men and Masculinities.” Sociology Compass, vol. 8, no. 3, 18 Mar. 2014, pp. 246–258., doi:10.1111/soc4.12134.
Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2015.
Chomsky, Noam, and Michel Foucault. The Chomsky-Foucault Debate on Human Nature. The New Press, 2006.
Williams 108
Clatterbaugh, Kenneth. “Literature of the U.S. Men's Movements.” Journal of Women in Culture and Society, vol. 25, no. 3, 2000, pp. 883–894., doi:https://doi.org/10.1086/495485.
Collins, Ben, and Brandy Zadrozny. “After Toronto Attack, Online Misogynists Praise Suspect as 'New Saint'.” NBC News, 24 Apr. 2018, www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/after-toronto- attack-online-misogynists-praise-suspect-new-saint-n868821.
Coltrane, Scott. “Theorizing Masculinities in Contemporary Social Science.” Theorizing Masculinities, edited by Harry Brod and Michael Kaufman, Sage Publishing , 1994, pp. 39–60.
Connell, R. W. “The Big Picture: Masculinities in Recent World History.” Theory and Society, vol. 22, no. 5, Oct. 1993, pp. 597–623., doi:10.1007/bf00993538.
Connell, R.W. Masculinities. Second ed., Polity Press, 2005.
Connell, R. W., and James W. Messerschmidt. “Hegemonic Masculinity: Rethinking the Concept.” Gender & Society, vol. 19, no. 6, 1 Dec. 2005, pp. 829–859., doi:10.1177/0891243205278639.
Cott, Nancy F. “Passionlessness: An Interpretation of Victorian Sexual Ideology, 1790–1850.” Signs, vol. 4, no. 2, 1978, pp. 219–236.
Delphy, Christine. “Rethinking Sex and Gender.” Feminism in the Study of Religion: A Reader, edited by Darlene M. Juschka, Continuum, 2006, pp. 411–425.
Domise, Andray. “The Hidden Crisis That's Fuelling the 'Incel Rebellion'.” Maclean's , 9 May 2018, www.macleans.ca/society/the-hidden-crisis-thats-fuelling-the-incel-rebellion/.
Dunphy, Peteer. “The State of Native American Voting Rights.” Brennan Center for Justice, 13 Mar. 2019, www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/state-native-american-voting- rights.
Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality, Volume 2: the Use of Pleasure. Vintage Books, 1990.
Ging, Debbie. “Alphas, Betas, and Incels: Theorizing the Masculinities of the Manosphere.” Men and Masculinities, vol. 22, no. 4, 10 May 2017, pp. 638–657., doi:10.1177/1097184x17706401.
Gramsci, Antonio, and David Forgacs. The Gramsci Reader: Selected Writings, 1916-1935. NYU Press, 2000.
Williams 109
Hoare, Quentin, and Geoffrey Nowell Smith, Editors and Translators. Selections From the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. Lawrence & Wishart, 1999.
Hoffert, Sylvia D. “The New Woman and the New Man at the Turn of the Century (1890- 1920).” A History of Gender in America, Prentice Hall, 2003, pp.283-317
Holloway, Susan, and Christopher J. Grieg. “Canadian Manhood(s)” Canadian Men and Masculinities: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives, edited by Wayne Martino and Christopher J. Greig, Canadian Scholars Press, 2012, pp. 119–138.
Holtz, Peter, et al. “Analyzing Internet Forums.” Journal of Media Psychology, vol. 24, no. 2, Jan. 2012, pp. 55–66., doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000062. hooks, bell. The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love. Washington Square Press, 2004
Hudson, Sandy. “Women of Colour Have Been Warning Us About MRAs for Years. It's Time to (Finally) Listen.” Flare, 30 Apr. 2018, https://www.flare.com/news/mra-at-universities/.
“Hypergamy.” Dictionary.Com, 2012, https://www.dictionary.com/browse/hypergamy
“Hypergamy.” Incel Wiki, July 2018, incels.wiki/w/Hypergamy.
“Incels.Co.” Incel Wiki, Oct. 2018. https://incels.wiki/w/Incels.co
Incels.co - Involuntary Celibate, incels.co/.
Ingraham, Christopher. “The Share of Americans Not Having Sex Has Reached a Record High.” The Washington Post , 29 Mar. 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/03/29/share-americans-not-having-sex-has- reached-record-high/.
Jaki, Sylvia, Tom De Smedt, Maja Gwóźdź, Rudresh Panchal, Alexander Rossa, and Guy De Pauw . “Online Hatred of Women in the Incels.me Forum: Linguistic Analysis and Automatic Detection.” 2018. https://organisms.be/downloads/incels.pdf.
Jennings, Rebecca. “Incels Categorize Women by Personal Style and Attractiveness.” Vox, Vox, 28 Apr. 2018, www.vox.com/2018/4/28/17290256/incel-chad-stacy-becky.
Williams 110
Karner, Tracy. “Fathers, Sons, and Vietnam: Masculinity and Betrayal in the Life Narratives of Vietnam Veterans with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.” American Studies, vol. 37, no. 1, 1996, pp. 63–94.
Katz, Jackson. “Engaging Men in Prevention of Violence Against Women.” Critical Issues on Violence against Women: International Perspectives and Promising Strategies, edited by Holly Johnson et al., Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2015, pp. 233–243.
Kaufman, Michael. “Men, Feminism, and Men's Contradictory Experiences of Power.” Theorizing Masculinities, edited by Harry Brod and Michael Kaufman, Sage Publishing, 1994, pp. 142–152.
Kendall, Lori. “Oh No! I'm A Nerd!’: Hegemonic Masculinity on an Online Forum.” Gender & Society, vol. 14, no. 2, Apr. 2000, pp. 256–274., doi:10.1177/089124300014002003. Kimmel,
Kimmel, Michael S. Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era. Nation Books, 2017.
Kimmel, Michael S. Manhood in America: A Cultural History. Oxford University Press, 1996.
Kimmel, Michael S. “Masculinity as Homophobia: Fear, Shame, and Silence in the Construction of Gender Identity.” Theorizing Masculinities, edited by Harry Brod and Michael Kaufman, Sage Publishing, 1994, pp. 119–141.
Lazar, Michelle M. “Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: Relevance for Current Gender and Language Research.” The Handbook of Language, Gender, and Sexuality: Handbook of Language, Gender and Sexuality, edited by Susan Ehrlich et al., Second ed., John Wiley & Sons. Inc, 2014, pp. 180–200.
Lyons, Matthew. Ctrl-Alt-Delete: An Antifascist Report on the Alternative Right. Political Research Associates, 2017.
Malone, Mary T. Women & Christianity. Blackrock Co., 2001.
Massanari, Adrienne. “#Gamergate and The Fappening: How Reddit’s Algorithm, Governance, and Culture Support Toxic Techno Cultures.” New Media & Society, vol. 19, no. 3, 9 Oct. 2016, pp. 329–346., doi:10.1177/1461444815608807.
Williams 111
Mead, Margaret. Male and Female: The Classic Study of the Sexes. First ed., Quill, 1949.
Messner, Michael A. Politics of Masculinities: Men in Movements. AltaMira Press, 2000.
Messner, Michael A. “'The Limits of ‘The Male Sex Role’: An Analysis of the Men's Liberation and Men's Rights Movements' Discourse.” Gender & Society, vol. 12, no. 3, June 1998, pp. 255– 276., doi:10.1177/0891243298012003002.
Milne, Vanessa, et al. “The Suicide Gap: Why Men Are More Likely to Kill Themselves.” Healthy Debate, 10 Aug. 2017, healthydebate.ca/2017/08/topic/male-suicide.
Mountford, J.B. “Topic Modeling The Red Pill.” Social Sciences, vol. 7, no. 3, 9 Mar. 2018, pp. 1–16., doi:10.3390/socsci7030042.
Nagle, Angela. Kill All Normies: Online Culture Wars from 4chan and Tumblr to Trump and the Alt-Right. John Hunt Publishing. 2017.
Ohlheiser , Abby. “Inside the Online World of ‘Incels,’ the Dark Corner of the Internet Linked to the Toronto Suspect.” The Washington Post , 25 Apr. 2018, www.washingtonpost.com/news/the- intersect/wp/2018/04/25/inside-the-online-world-of-incels-the-dark-corner-of-the-internet- linked-to-the-toronto-suspect/.
Pelletier, Francine. “30 Years since the Montreal Massacre, We Still See a Deadly Hatred of Women.” CBC Radio , 29 Nov. 2019, https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thesundayedition/the-sunday- edition-for-december-1-2019-1.5377096/30-years-since-the-montreal-massacre-we-still-see-a- deadly-hatred-of-women-1.5377220.
Philips, S.U. “Gender Ideology: Cross-Cultural Aspects.” International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2001, pp. 6016–6020., doi:10.1016/b0-08-043076-7/03962-0.
Public Health Agency of Canada. “Government of Canada.” Canada.ca, Government of Canada, 22 July 2019, www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/suicide-prevention/suicide-canada.html.
Public Health Agency of Canada. “Government of Canada.” Suicide in Canada: Key Statistics (Infographic) - Canada.ca, Government of Canada, 4 Mar. 2020, www.canada.ca/en/public- health/services/publications/healthy-living/suicide-canada-key-statistics-infographic.html.
“/r/inceltears.” Incel Wiki. Aug. 2018. https://incels.wiki/w//r/inceltears
Williams 112
Robinson, Sally. “Expression, Repression, and Male Hysteria: Marked Men and the Wounds of a Damned Masculinity.” Marked Men: White Masculinity in Crisis, Columbia University Press, 2000, pp. 153–192.
Sanday, Peggy Reeves. “Margaret Meads View of Sex Roles in Her Own and Other Societies.” American Anthropologist vol. 82, no. 2, June 1980, pp.340–348.
Serna, Joseph, et al. “Isla Vista Attack Survivor Says Smirking Elliot Rodger Looked ‘Happy.’” Los Angeles Times, 30 May 2014, https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-isla-vista- survivor-interview-elliot-rodger-20140530-story.html.
Schmitz, Rachel, and Emily Kazyak. “Masculinities in Cyberspace: An Analysis of Portrayals of Manhood in Men’s Rights Activist Websites.” Social Sciences, vol. 5, no. 2, ser. 18, 12 May 2016, pp. 1–16. 18, doi:10.3390/socsci5020018.
Smiler, Andrew. Is Masculinity Toxic?: A Primer for the 21st Century. Thames & Hudson, 2019.
Smith-Rosenberg, Carroll. “The Female World of Love and Ritual: Relations between Women in Nineteenth-Century America.” Signs, vol. 1, no. 1, 1975, pp. 1–29.
Sonnad, Nikhil, and Tim Squirrell “The alt-right is creating its own dialect. Here’s the dictionary” Quartz, 30 October, 2017.
Strong-Boag, Veronica. “Women's Suffrage in Canada .” The Canadian Encyclopedia, 2016, www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/suffrage.
Struthers, James. “The Great Depression in Canada.” The Canadian Encyclopedia, 11 July 2013, https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/great-depression.
“Suicide Statistics.” American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, 14 May 2020, afsp.org/suicide-statistics/.
Swain, Diana. “Navigating a Cryptic Post and Dark Corners of the Internet after Toronto's Van Attack Social Sharing.” CBC News , 28 Apr. 2018.
Tait, Amelia. “The Self-Hating Incel Killers Show How Dangerous the Manosphere Is Becoming for All of Us.” New Statesman, 10 May, 2018.
Williams 113
Thomas, Robert. “Electronically Recorded Interview of Alek Minassian by Detective Robert Thomas (3917) of the Sex Crimes Unit Polygraph Unit”. Toronto Police Service, 23 April, 2018.
Thornhill, Randy, and Craig Palmer. A Natural History of Rape: Biological Bases of Sexual Coercion. MIT, 1999.
Tolentino, Jia. “The Rage of Incels.” The New Yorker, 15 May 2018, www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-rage-of-the-incels.
Tremblay, Gilles, and Pierre L’Heureux. “The Genesis of the Construction of the Male Identity” Canadian Perspectives on Men and Masculinities: An Interdisciplinary Reader edited by Jason A. Laker, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp.13-31.
Van Oost, Ellen. “Making the Computer Masculine: The Historical Roots of Gendered Representations.” Women, Work and Computerization, vol. 44, 2000, pp. 9–16., doi:10.1007/978-0-387-35509-2_2.
Van Valkenburgh, Shawn P. “Digesting the Red Pill: Masculinity and Neoliberalism in the Manosphere.” Men and Masculinities, 4 Dec. 2018, pp. 1–20., doi:10.1177/1097184x18816118.
Wendling, Mike. Alt-Right: from 4chan to the White House. Pluto Press, 2018.
Wood, Julia T. “The Rhetorical Shaping of Gender: Men's Movements in America.” Gendered Lives: Communication, Gender, and Culture, Cengage, 2019, pp. 65–93.
Žižek Slavoj. The Sublime Object of Ideology. Verso, 1989.
Žižek, Slavoj, writer. The Pervert’s Guide to Ideology. 2012.