#MeToo in the Manosphere: The Formation of a Counter Discourse on the Swedish Online Forum Flashback

ABSTRACT

In Sweden, a relative consensus of liberal and feminist values has long been dominant in public discourse. This could be observed in coverage of the #MeToo movement, which was largely presented in a positive light by legacy media, where critical voices were instead found on alternative and social media. This article contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the impact of #MeToo beyond the mainstream discourse by investigating how #MeToo was discussed on the online forum Flashback during the period spanning October—December 2017. Our findings show how the #MeToo debate in this forum reproduced an anti-feminist discourse from the manosphere but also challenged it, as attitudes towards sexual harassment were negotiated and reframed in dialogue with mainstream media. #MeToo thus also contributed to an increased awareness about sexual harassment in this context. However, while a feminist agenda was being strengthened in legacy media, the anti-feminist views on Flashback became more pronounced. Interestingly, while the dominant feminist discourse around Swedish #MeToo avoided the concept “feminism”, it was often used in this counter discourse on Flashback, where it signified a hated, albeit powerful and transformative, force in society.

KEYWORDS:

• #MeToo
• anti-feminism
• feminism
• counter discourse
• manosphere

Introduction

The global impact of the #MeToo movement against sexual harassment and abuse has been described as significant, both in terms of engagement and media coverage (Mendes et al., 2018). Swedish news media were especially positive towards the movement (Hansson et al., 2020; Sveningsson, Hansson, et al., 2022). While the reports initially focused primarily on famous people, by the end of 2017, the local Swedish #MeToo-movement had shifted the focus from Hollywood to the broader Swedish context. Through numerous petitions from various professions and areas of interest, large groups of “women and non-binary people”¹ joined forces to show how the problem of sexual harassment was a structural problem that ran across all levels of society. Over 75 petitions were published in leading newspapers or industry journals, which led to a broad mobilization (Hansson et al., 2021, 2023). This, in turn, helped to clarify the political nature of the movement and established a strong feminist discourse in mainstream media (Hansson et al., 2020; Sveningsson, Hansson, et al., 2022).

However, while the Swedish media discourse clearly had a feminist framing and encountered very little resistance, few news articles about #MeToo described it as feminism, instead presenting it as a question of social justice and worker’s rights (Hansson et al., 2020; Sveningsson, Hansson, et al., 2022). Previous research shows how the word feminism is avoided by feminist journalists Sveningsson, Ganetz, et al., 2022; Wasterlain, 2020), and our preliminary analyses demonstrated how words like “feminism” or “feminists” were mainly used by those who opposed feminism. These discussions were held away from mainstream public spaces, notably in alternative media with a rightwing populist profile or in more unregulated online forums (Lindqvist & Ganetz, 2020). One such popular unregulated online forum is the Swedish discussion forum Flashback. Flashback is an influential discussion forum in the Swedish public where more uncensored discussions about news reporting take place. Therefore, to better understand how the counter discourse about #MeToo was formulated and developed outside the mainstream discourse, this article set out to investigate Flashback discussions on the subject.

Background

The Framing of Feminism

Historically, in their framing of feminist activism, the media has contributed to the oppression, belittling and distortion of feminist movements (Larrondo Ureta, 2020). The media have, for example, undermined the legitimacy of feminist movements in various ways by portraying them as frivolous, conflict-ridden, and un-supported (Mendes, 2011; Wendt, 2016). Feminist movements have been blamed for portraying women as victims (Christiansen & Høyer, 2015) and for fighting for issues that are unimportant or already resolved (Jaworska & Krishnamurthy, 2012). Their representatives have also often been demonized and portrayed as hostile, unattractive, and lesbian man-haters (Lind & Salo, 2002; Mendes, 2011). Therefore, the media coverage of the Swedish #MeToo movement marks a shift compared to the portrayal of previous feminist movements (Sveningsson, Hansson, et al., 2022). However, when feminist goals are incorporated into public policy agendas, and mirrored in the mainstream media discourse, misogynist discourses instead tend to flourish online (Banet-Weiser & Miltner, 2016; Bartlett et al., 2014; Koulouris, 2018; Mendes et al., 2018).

In ideological terms, anti-feminism is generally embedded in ideas of a higher order: God’s will, biology, national destiny, or social stability (Blais & Dupuis-Déri, 2012; Maaranen & Tienari, 2020). In the so-called manosphere, anti-feminism focuses primarily on masculinity and the position of white heterosexual men in North American and European societies (Banet-Weiser & Miltner, 2016; Marwick & Caplan, 2018). The manosphere is not a certain place online but rather consists of several discursive communities held together by an ideology concerned with the supposed consequences of feminism and the alleged dominance of women. A fundamental assumption is that women, the values of women in general, and feminists in particular, has come to dominate men and contemporary society at large. In this ideology, men are depicted as the victims of feminists, and feminism is equalled with hatred towards men. A common line of argument is that since women’s empowerment is the reason behind men’s suffering, the solution is to curb the influence of feminism and re-establish men’s supremacy (Blais & Dupuis-Déri, 2012). Here, masculinity is reclaimed through cis-normative, heterosexist, and misogynist discourses that enforce hegemonic gender norms (Moloney & Love, 2018). In these discourses, women who speak out in public and threaten the ideology are shamed as sluts, feminists, or social justice warriors (Ging & Siapera, 2018; Sundén & Paasonen, 2018). The latter are especially seen as monstruous and emotion-driven (Massanari & Chess, 2018). These ideas are shared among different types of men’s movements, notably the so-called incel movement, in reproducing ideas about women as calculating and exploitative of men (Moloney & Love, 2018; Vallerga & Zurbriggen, 2022). Here, different male positions are pointed out: the alpha male, who embodies a desirable masculinity that women aspire to; the beta man who forms sexual relationships by offering resources and commitment to the woman; and the incel (involuntary celibate) who wants sexual relationships, but is unable to, or chooses not to, create them (Ging, 2019; Lindsay, 2021). Femonationalism is another related discourse, where nationalists ideas intersect with racism and gender equality appears as something modern and connected to certain national identities, which are contrasted against supposedly patriarchal immigrants or minority groups (Farris, 2017).

The Swedish Online Forum Flashback

Extreme discourses, such as the ones reproduced in the manosphere, are often blamed on the design of social media, which are claimed to lead to a polarization of extreme positions rather than a broader understanding of different perspectives (Rho et al., 2018). Moreover, while major social media services such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Twitter are largely curated by algorithms and scoring systems, there are platforms that avoid this type of design. The Swedish online forum Flashback is one of them. Flashback started in 1983 as an underground magazine and was taken online in 1995. Today, Flashback is mostly known for its online discussion forum. Launched in 2000, it has become known as a defender of free speech, providing a forum for debate that includes a wide variety of topics and political views. According to the membership list (as of 3 January 2024), Flashback has 1 580 068 registered user accounts. However, unlike, for example, Facebook, the forum can also be accessed and read by non-registered users; thus, its audience is considerably larger. In 2018, 33% of the Swedish population reported using Flashback. The forum was especially popular among young men, where 60% of Swedish men between the ages of 26 and 35 reported using Flashback (Palm et al., 2018).

Flashback represents a type of technology culture that characterized the early development of internet discussion fora. The content is not filtered based on algorithms guided by popularity or user’s browsing history but is hierarchically organized under different topics.² Registered users with an email address can create and comment on posts. Unlike closed discussion groups in, for example, Facebook, there are few means to prevent anyone from participating in the discussions. When disagreement occurs, adversaries instead fight in different ways, for example, through humour and irony, which are important rhetorical resources (Blomberg & Stier, 2019; Malmqvist, 2015). The number of moderators is just under 100, which means that the content is far from strictly moderated. The forum is notorious for harbouring opinions that do not fit into the public debate, and discussions also cover controversial topics such as sex purchase, incels and the influence of various drugs. However, the forum has also gained attention for hosting citizen journalism where large groups of users have joined forces in adding pieces to the jigsaw puzzles of, for instance, unsolved crimes.

Despite its long history, and the fact that it has often been at the centre of debate concerning free speech and hate speech, there is little research on Flashback’s actual content. Because of its unregulated character, Flashback discussions can give insight into alternative discourses surrounding #MeToo, sexual harassment and feminism, that are not expressed in mainstream news media.

Method

In investigating the alternative discourse around #MeToo, Flashback provides an interesting case. Its emphasis on free speech allows for the expression of various opinions, including those that diverge from the mainstream discourse. Flashback also hosted a large number of discussions about #MeToo in various subgroups.

The material consists of discussion threads published between October and December 2017. Within this period, we focused on two distinctive phases. The first phase mirrored the beginning of #MeToo, before the first Swedish #MeToo petitions were published (Oct 17 – Nov 9). The second phase (Dec 12 - Dec 31) was chosen to get an idea of what the discussions looked like after most of the Swedish #MeToo petitions had been published in major newspapers. This phase also followed the most intensive period with respect to media attention (Hansson et al., 2021). The discussion threads examined on Flashback relatively often occurred as a reaction to the media’s reporting of #MeToo. Figure 1 shows the correlation between news reports and the discussions.

Figure 1. Articles in Swedish national news (print, Webb, TV & radio) with “metoo” in title/intro (n = 6215, in grey), and posts on flashback (n = 4168 posts in 102 discussion threads, in black). Phase 1 before the first Swedish #MeToo-petition Oct 21 – Nov 9 (n = 610 posts in 28 threads), and phase 2 at the end of the fall Dec 12 - Dec 31 (n = 1477 posts in 20 threads).

The Flashback discussions were selected through a search where the keyword “metoo” was to be included either in the title of the discussion thread or within the first three pages (36 posts) of the discussion. The search resulted in 102 discussion threads, of which 48 were published within the chosen periods: 20 from the first phase and 28 from the second. All 48 discussions were selected for the analysis; however, discussion threads were sometimes long, and therefore we drew a limit and analysed only the first 120 posts per discussion thread.

The discussions were analysed inductively using a thematic analysis that allowed us to see how certain topics were particularly prominent in the material (Braun & Clarke, 2019). The quotes that appear in the article are carefully selected as particularly illustrative for the themes that were generated through the process. Each of the themes represents a larger material of similar quotes. The initial coding was done in Nvivo, which allowed us to develop the descriptive codes and initial themes in an iterative process. However, we also used the advanced search function in Acrobat Pro, which allowed us to search for different words to see how often they were used and in what ways.

Methodological and Ethical Challenges

Interpreting material from social media is challenging for several reasons. One difficulty lies in how to interpret utterances where the manifested content differs from the intended meaning, which is the case concerning ironic comments, which were quite prevalent in the discussions. Being able to interpret humour and ambiguous memes is an important digital literacy in these contexts, and for readers who do not belong to the group, it can be difficult to decode and understand the layers of meaning (Boyd, 2014; Gal et al., 2022). Meaning-making also occurs on several levels where the technical platform, the participants’ self-presentation, and other contextual factors together provide clues to how the text should be interpreted (Gal et al., 2022). In our case, we were less interested in whether participants meant what they said literally; we rather saw the texts as expressions of different discourses on #MeToo and feminism, which put these phenomena in a particular interpretive framework.

An additional challenge in analysing discussions on Flashback consists of the moderation of threads, where moderators can bring a discussion that started in one thread into another if they feel it fits better there. Individual users can also filter posts from people they do not want to have discussions with, which means that the dialogue may be difficult to follow. In the study at hand, this was a minor problem, as we were not interested in individual persons’ interactions, but rather what arguments were articulated in the various discussion posts on an aggregated level.

Finally, we need to say a few words on the ethical challenges. We only used data that was publicly available online at the time of our data collection. However, even though discussions are public, they may not necessarily be perceived as such by the users. The effect of context collapse, and the risk that the analysis generates potentially sensitive personal information (Williams et al., 2017), constitute other challenges. Due to ethical considerations, we therefore took precautions to protect the anonymity of the discussants by omitting usernames and making small changes to the posts, like changing names of some of the persons and places mentioned in the posts. The fact that all quotes are translated from Swedish to English further prevents the tracking of quotes to their original context.

Findings

Flashback is organized into 16 subject areas, each of which has several sub-areas that contain discussions categorized into different topics (Figure 2). #MeToo was foremost discussed in four of the subject areas: Society (21 topics and 734 posts, foremost in the sub-area “Equality and discrimination”), Home, residence & family (four topics and 472 posts, foremost in “Relationships and coexistence”), Politics (six topics and 363 posts, foremost in “Feminism”), and Culture & Media (six topics and 356 post, foremost in “Censorship and free speech”).

Figure 2. Number of posts about #MeToo in different subject areas during phase 1 and 2.

As mentioned in the article’s introduction, analyses of the Swedish media’s coverage of #MeToo have shown that it was generally positive, and the discussion was often placed on editorial pages and news pages rather than in the lifestyle section, clearly positioning #MeToo as important (Askanius & Møller Hartley, 2019). The same pattern was observed in the analysed Flashback material. The posts occurred in subject areas such as Society (rather than Lifestyle), and both this subject area and Politics grew stronger after the publishing of the #MeToo petitions. If #MeToo was criticized at all in legacy media, articles generally started by expressing sympathy for the movement: that it was important and had a good purpose (Sveningsson, Hansson, et al., 2022). In a similar manner, many posts on Flashback began by paying tribute to #MeToo, where discussants emphasized being in favour of gender equality. They then proceeded by pointing out problems they saw with the movement, and made suggestions regarding how #MeToo could be “improved”:

This is my opinion about “metoo” I think it’s a good idea because it’s a really shitty behavior that I don’t understand how it can happen in the 21st century and it shows signs of deficient impulse control and so on. But feminism, isn’t that supposed to be about equality between sexes? In what way is it so if they only start a campaign for women and not men? When myself and other men that I know have been sexually abused, often by women. I also believe it’s more stigmatizing for men to speak out than for women. Don’t know what feminism in Sweden wants, probably to always depict how all women are victims, and all men are terrible. Make big generalizations in other words, and create more man-haters. They rarely come up with anything constructive, or any fact-based claims. Then if you’re arguing with a feminist, it’s pretty special to do… They only throw out that you’re an antifeminist, or a horrible person if you criticize or question the ideology.

In the post above, we can see how several different ideas and arguments are woven together. We see how the writer initially expresses support for the movement and moves on to pointing out what he sees as problems: an overly one-sided focus on women as exposed, the difficulty for men in reporting abuse, and feminism as confrontational and conflict-creating.

In the following text, we will take a closer look at how the Flashback discussants talked about topics related to #MeToo. In the analysis, a total of 44 codes were grouped into eight themes, of which five are presented here, these being the most dominant in the material: the meaning of sexual assault, who is responsible for it, the framing of the perpetrators, the framing of the victims, and the meaning of feminism. These themes partly coincide with the themes found in our previous studies of legacy media, which is not surprising as the discussions on Flashback were often triggered by news reports in legacy media.

Real Sexual Harassment Is Not That Widespread

Much of the attention around #MeToo has concerned the media’s naming of alleged perpetrators, but also how sexual assault should be defined (Lindqvist & Ganetz, 2020; Sveningsson, Hansson, et al., 2022). These topics were also prevalent in the Flashback material, especially during the first analysed phase. In general, discussants distance themselves from “online witch hunts” and advocate a legal procedure.

Related to the discussions on legislation are the discussions that were held about how sexual harassment should be defined: what it means, how big the problem is, and how rules for consent should be interpreted. The Swedish #MeToo debate brought, among other things, an increased description of sexual harassment as a continuum, where both major and minor violations are part of a larger pattern (Hansson et al., 2020). This perspective was not expressed in the Flashback material. On the contrary, the discussants make clear distinctions between “real” abuses and what they see as exaggerated reactions to imagined or made-up events:

Why, this is just insane! “He said I was good-looking, so I reported that bastard!” MANY women who whip up something out of nothing and seem to kind of take the opportunity, just for the sake of it! It also takes focus from those who have been exposed for real!

So what is a “real” assault, and what does it mean to be exposed “for real”? Here, the image conveyed is quite black and white, and the question of sexual harassment is often reduced to debating whether there are grounds for prosecution. If there is not, it is generally not seen as a problem. The discussions therefore express the opinion that women, spurred on by left-wing media and feminism, accuse men unjustly. They also state that the number of less serious incidents brought to the attention by the #MeToo movement overshadows the more serious cases.

The main reason is that “real” victims don’t get heard because hundred women tell us that someone accidentally touched their ass once on the bus ten years ago. It belittles women who have actually been subjected to rape or gross sexual harassment. They become one in the crowd, even if what they have been exposed to is thousands times worse. Exactly. That’s what bothers me. They lump the whole #MeToo thing together and people seem to get to define it as they want to. Totally misleading. But it’s also a way for the left-wing media to brainwash people. To make everyone feel affected. The most vulnerable victims don’t get to say anything. It’s a shame. Hope that will change.

Something that is discussed within the theme is also the extent of the problem, where a common position is that sexual harassment is not as widespread as #MeToo had made it seem. This is likely related to the narrower definition of abuse illustrated in the quotes above, according to which a large proportion of #MeToo testimonies should simply not be classed as abuse. Therefore, discussants say that although #MeToo is basically a good thing, the movement has gone too far and been taken out of proportion. The problem, they say, is not as serious as it has been portrayed as, nor is it so important that it should draw attention away from more important political issues. These issues will be discussed in more detail in the following sections.

Women Are the Responsible Ones

A recurring issue in the discussions is the question of responsibility, namely whether the responsibility for the problem is individual or can be linked to larger structures, and moreover whether the woman or the man is responsible for the situation.

One of the purposes of the Swedish #MeToo petitions was to point out the importance of structures—to draw focus away from individual cases and show how sexual harassment is part of a larger pattern (Hansson et al., 2020). This position is something that discussants object to. Above all, they express dissatisfaction with what they perceive as a demand for collective responsibility and the blaming of men as a group. In the discussions, the perpetrators are described as individuals for which other men cannot be responsible. Instead, a recurring theme is women’s responsibility.

I personally believe that women who are offered film roles in exchange to sex can make the easy choice to politely decline and walk away with dignity. If they have bought their celebrity with sex, they should not whine about it several years later, because it’s because of them that it’s allowed to continue when they could instead have tried to counteract it at the time. Let’s also not forget that Weinstein is only accused and not convicted. I do believe that he has gained sex through his position of power, but that being said, I’d still argue that he’s an individual and thus responsible for his actions. He is not “all men”, and therefore “all men” shouldn’t have to feel accused. The women on the other hand, could have done more to avoid the abuse, definitely.

The quote expresses the idea that sexual exploitation and abuse is something that women have chosen to submit to in order to gain certain benefits, such as career opportunities. Here, sexual harassment is constructed as a matter of transactions, in which women buy career opportunities in exchange for sex. From this perspective, then, the abuse becomes something for which the woman is responsible.

Ideas of women’s responsibility are also expressed in argumentations about the importance of not putting oneself in risky situations or exposing oneself to danger.

I also wonder why women repeatedly end up alone in parks, take black taxis, etc. Why did you ride an elevator alone with a strange man? Would a better option have been to wait for the next elevator? I was taught as young not to ride around by myself on public transport, get recklessly drunk so that I get blackouts, etc. That subway line is dangerous, etc. Are women not taught this knowledge?

In posts like these, the world is portrayed as fraught with dangers, both for men and women, and it is the individual’s responsibility to avoid putting themselves in potentially dangerous situations. According to this logic, if abuse occurs, it is because the women do not take adequate safety measures. Women are also given the responsibility to say no, as if she had a choice, and to put up sufficient resistance.

Another type of post that emphasizes women’s responsibility are those that deal with women’s poor judgement when it comes to choosing men. According to this view, it is only a small group of men that women want to sleep with, and these are so sought after that they can do whatever they want. In this discourse, women are happy to be sexually harassed as long as the man is popular, attractive or rich. Thus, the women are responsible for the abuse, as they prefer and choose the rotten alpha males, but ignore and despise the “ordinary” nice guys.

No feminist so far has managed to give me a good explanation why they chose the popular guys in high school who were those who pawed the most. And why they didn’t prefer the harmless nerds instead if the groping was such a terrible abuse and men have to be put in their place. But I’m not one of the ten-twenty percent that women idolize and who grope everything and everyone… You have to bite the bullet.

Several of the posts that discuss men who take liberties convey a bitterness that those who conform to the rules of the game, who are kind and do not take liberties against women, are not rewarded for their good behaviour, but instead are left without women’s company.

How do you have time to live up to all this groping, all these rapes, that men in general seem to be guilty of? Those of us who feel left out, time to roll up our sleeves now? Do you feel like you weren’t there when all the ACTION occurred? Lonely and abandoned. All the things you could have done without asking permission. So many waists, breasts, butts, and pussies that “everyone else” groped. I feel I’m outside of the male role in this area. You too? So many concerts you’ve been to without taking liberties.

These types of posts can be interpreted as expressions of an incel ideology, where women exploit successful men in exchange of sexual relationships, but deny other men (Ging, 2019; Lindsay, 2021). Entries such as those above depict #MeToo as a mockery of the men who do not dare to approach women, where it becomes a further reminder of their failure as sexual partners. In this discourse, perpetrators are alpha males who can approach women in a way that less successful men are not able or allowed to.

In addition to the individual situation, women are also made responsible for the mere existence of the perpetrators. In one of the discussions, an argument develops, taking its starting point in the claim that many mass murderers and rapists grow up with single mothers, whose exercise of power against their sons cause them to develop a hatred of women, strong enough to make them resort to violence. The discussants state that behind every violent man there are oppressive women: mothers, teachers, superiors.

I think so too, there’s no other country in the world where women subject young men to as much psychological abuse as in Sweden (well white women exposing white boys/children/men). Not because he is offended, but because he was psychologically abused by women while growing up. Everyone won’t commit suicide even though that’s a typical problem of white young men today. Someone will take a darker path. It would be almost illogical if it didn’t happen.

An interesting observation is how in these cases discussants depart from the premise of individual responsibility. The prevalence of sexual assault is here attributed to a society that has been feminized, and consequently men’s violence is ultimately women’s responsibility.

The Others Are the Perpetrators

Notably, the Swedish #MeToo petitions clearly showed how perpetrators are found everywhere in society and that they are usually ordinary men. This is something that Flashback discussants clearly object to. Here, the perpetrators are instead presented as “others” who differ from the “ordinary” man. The image of the perpetrator that appears by far most often in the discussions is that of the immigrant, in particular men from the Middle East and North Africa. Discussants talk about how men from these countries have a view of women that differs from the Swedish one, thereby conjuring up an image of the Swedish man as better because he is more equal. This is also common right-wing nationalist rhetoric in several European countries where equality appears as connected to the national identity, in contrast to immigrants who are portrayed as oppressing women (Farris, 2017). At the same time, the discussions (somewhat paradoxically) express a very negative view of feminism, which is associated with an elite, leftist ideology, and women’s desire to dominate men.

The discussants often comment on the overrepresentation of immigrant men in crime statistics. In these narratives, #MeToo becomes part of a larger conspiracy, where feminists and liberal media try to cover up the crimes committed by immigrants. The argumentation is that feminists are out to jail ordinary, Swedish men for minor offences, instead of dealing with major crimes (supposedly committed by immigrants).

The purpose of #MeToo is to cover up the serious sex crimes where immigrants from the Middle East are greatly overrepresented. As well as slandering white western men. There’s a special place in hell for Swedish women who blame Swedish men in this situation.

According to these discussants, women who accuse Swedish men of sexual harassment are not only misinformed but evil, and they contribute to society’s preoccupation with this non-existent problem instead of dealing with the great threat from immigrants.

The funniest thing about this mess is that it’s the same PC rabble that has made sure Sweden is invaded by men with very dubious views of women. I expect that in the long run, women’s place and right in the public sphere will decrease dramatically. There’s some sort of poetic justice about it all. Completely self-inflicted and we white men won’t give a fuck, because we’ve seen what too much freedom leads to. This is the only thing we’ve got in common with the imported Arabs. At the same time, as a man, I don’t have to feel I’m required to take on the male role of gentleman, car mechanic, free carpenter to the single woman or dance partner for the lonely wallflower, be the breadwinner, etc. Nowadays, I just laugh and say “Go to hell. You can fix that yourself. Cunt!”

The story of men from other cultures is part of a larger narrative linked to the nation, which is a common theme in the Manosphere. According to this ideology, a stable nation-state is based on strong males defending the country from other invading males. When feminism gains ground, and men’s influence decreases, the state becomes feminized and weakened. As #MeToo removes powerful men from positions of power by accusing them of abuse, the influence of the wrong kind of men (immigrants) will increase, thus increasing the incidence of misogynist ideas.

The story of the “ordinary” and “real” man often recurs in the discussions. According to the discussants, it is demanding to be a real Swedish man who lives up to women’s demands. The real man should be able to support a woman and take care of her; he should do handy jobs such as maintaining and repairing the car and the house. He is also supposed to be a gentleman who opens doors, buys flowers and volunteers as a dance partner. At the same time, he is expected to be equal. The discussants’ frustration with the changed rules of the game is evident in posts that discuss how men nowadays double work without reward, as #MeToo and ideas about gender equality means that they no longer receive sexual favours in return for their efforts. The discussions include many entries dealing with men’s marginalization and a masculinity in crisis, which is explained by women’s increased empowerment, gender equality and immigration.

There is also a great deal of criticism of left-liberal actors and ideologies, which discussants blame for this development. Alongside immigrant men, another type of perpetrator mentioned are men who belong to a left-wing social elite. These are typically men who portray themselves as siding with feminism, but who have now been revealed as hypocrites.

Since this hunt started, I’ve finally understood why all these women hate Swedish white men so much. If you’re in their bubble and are subjected to master suppression techniques and sexual harassment, it’s probably easy to believe that the whole society looks like that. But don’t smear the disgusting behavior of those people in power on us white middle-class people, we men also suffer from their bullying even if it’s not always sexual. Regardless, it’s now clear who are the real bastards behind this petition. Powerful s/his (also lesbian women) in the media industry with clear left-liberal views based on the new feminism who often looks down on the white working-class man.

The quote above shows how notions of perpetrators vs. ordinary men are tied to class, political orientation, and ethnicity. While the perpetrators are either immigrants or depraved media men and politicians, the “ordinary” man is described as a regular white working-class or middle-class guy. It occurs relatively often in the material that discussants gloat over the elite men who are exposed, especially if they have a foreign origin. Discussants basically welcome the exposure of these perpetrators; the problem, however, is that Swedish women have come to believe that the behaviour of these degenerate and power-hungry bullying types applies also to “ordinary” Swedish men. This is a recurring narrative about how the elite men, the desirable alpha male, get—and take—advantages, while the “ordinary” men are innocently accused.

Ordinary Men Are Victims

When victims of sexual harassment are mentioned in the discussions, it is usually ethnic Swedish women being subjected to assault rapes, typically by men from other cultures. Something that is interesting, however, and which makes a big difference compared to the discourse in legacy media, is that discussants talk very little about female victims. Instead, they talk about men as victims—regarding accusations, as we saw in the previous sections, but also as victims of sexual abuse.

One type of narrative that recurs frequently in the material concerns the abuse that men are subjected to. This can sometimes be seen as an expression of what-aboutism—a tactic relatively common in online discussions that involves drawing attention away from the issue at hand by pointing to others who have also behaved badly. Thus, the discussion is steered away to other topics and loses focus. When the tactic is used in the Flashback discussions, it belittles men’s abuse of women by pointing out that women can also be perpetrators, and that men are also exposed (but when men are exposed, they receive no attention).

A female teacher at school bent down and picked up “dropped things” and showed her panties, wiggled her ass and when she got to my desk she put her cleavage in my face. She stroked her hand over my hair and shoulders, touched my hands and constantly gave me a come hither gaze. Her movement patterns around me were so challenging that other students noticed it. When she realized that nothing was going to happen, she lowered my grades from Passed with distinction to Failed.

As the quote above illustrates, the stories have common denominators with the testimonies published under the petitions: there, too, harassment often occurred when superiors—those older and in a power position—subjected their subordinates to unwelcome advances from which it was difficult to escape (Sveningsson, Ganetz, et al., 2022). Something that differs in the testimonials posted in the Flashback discussions, however, is how often they carry elements of bragging:

At my last job, I was exposed to a female manager who touched my butt in the elevator, wanted to slow dance and made dirty suggestions at the staff party. She said I needed to “make a little effort” if I was going to be allowed to join the R&D department’s trip to a trade show in the US. She also called me “the goat” and “the stud”. I ended up in the same bed as her in a conference hotel (despite the fact that she was married). But, it’s not like I’m complaining…

The stories of men’s exposure to advances from women can be seen as a description of a desirable masculinity, being the “Alpha man” that women desire. In this incel discourse, sexual access and relationships are portrayed as a form of capital that a few men have an abundance of and other men are denied (Ging, 2019; Lindsay, 2021). To the image of desirable masculinity can be added the treats of strength, character and self-control: the man who does not see himself as a victim, who puts restraints on himself despite women’s advances, and who does not take advantage of the situation (although he could lend a hand out of generosity if the women insist).

The stories of forward women can also be seen as a way of ridiculing the #MeToo movement by shifting the meaning of #MeToo’s narrative, and making abuses appear as erotic fantasies rather than experienced traumas.

Feminism Equals Man-Hate

This study started with our curiosity about why the word feminist or feminism was used to a significantly higher degree in alternative media such as Flashback compared to legacy media. During the #Metoo movement’s first months, the Swedish media discourse was clearly the carrier of a feminist agenda, defining the problem as a structural and political problem rather than something that could be solved legally or socially (Hansson et al., 2020). At the same time, the media, as well as the Swedish #MeToo petitions, avoided defining #MeToo in terms of feminism. In contrast, the Flashback discussions about #MeToo used the word “feminism” often, and in a negative sense, to describe an equality work that has run out of control. Here, a clear distinction is made between equality, which is seen as good, and feminism, which is seen as something evil.

Feminism has never been, and never will be, about any kind of equality.

While the word “feminism” was consistently used in a negative sense, we noticed a certain shift in the material between the first and second phase. In the first phase, feminism and feminists were not the main subject of posts but rather mentioned in passing, as something that discussants did not agree with. This can be exemplified by the quote below, where the writer defends the #MeToo movement, while in passing positioning feminism as something deviant and strange.

I’m pretty sure that the absolute vast majority of women understand that men mean no harm. There is a clique of ultra-feminists who insist that men are animals and do it for the hell of it. But that’s not the point. Most chicks are totally normal as hell. [—] The campaign is sort of there to highlight to men that it is actually a problem. It is neither sexual abuse nor harassment to say “No but hey, sexy! Damn what a hot lipstick.” to a female colleague. But it gets tiring to hear it from everyone, all day.

In the second phase, however, feminism and feminists were more often positioned as the problem and described as something that threatens the very foundations of society.

Everyone must speak up when the feminists are rampaging. I know that men’s attitude towards gaping feminists has always been to not care. The feminists have gained/gain ground all the time with that tactic from the men. Quota of women. Quota of parental leave. Expanded sexual crime legislation and expanded concept of rape in combination with weakened proof requirements. General stigmatization of men as perpetrators of violence. The introduction of the ideology of gender theory on every single program in universities. Gender preschools etc. Women must not be criticized by men, etc. What does this do in practice? Yes, idiocy has consequences for society. We see the impact within the police, community defense, the judiciary, schools, social services, healthcare.

The quote above describes how feminists have advanced women’s opportunities in Sweden through legal and cultural means. Feminism’s weakening of traditional power structures is in this way argued to lead to the weakening of various social institutions, and in the long run, the dismantling of the welfare society.

When we compare the #MeToo discussions on Flashback with what was discussed in legacy media, we could see how the themes on Flashback are quite similar to the themes discussed in legacy media. In phase two, however, as a feminist agenda had become more clearly established in the legacy media, the anti-feminist sentiment and conspiracy theories were strengthened on Flashback.

Concluding Discussion

#MeToo increased the awareness of the problem with sexual harassment. In Sweden, the discussion of sexual harassment became widespread, and was developed on several levels in society, including in anti-feminist discursive communities. The aim of this article was to investigate how the #MeToo counter discourse was formulated and developed in one such context—the online forum Flashback.

The analysis of the Flashback discussions showed how the discourse on sexual harassment differed from the hegemonic one in several ways. Notably, the discussions opposed the Swedish #MeToo petitions’ description of sexual harassment as a broad concept that includes a range of violations, where minor ones are part of a normalization process that paves the way for more serious abuse. Instead, discussants emphasize the importance of distinguishing between petty things and “real” abuse, and the scale of the problem was played down. This pattern follows strategies to belittle feminist issues or make the problem appear already solved, as found in previous anti-feminist media discourses (Jaworska & Krishnamurthy, 2012; Mendes, 2011; Wendt, 2016). Similarly, “ordinary” women’s alleged experiences of sexual harassment were pitted against the agenda of supposedly man-hating feminists (Christiansen & Høyer, 2015). Thus, as the hegemonic discourse in mainstream media has become more feminist-friendly, strategies that legacy media used to employ against feminist movements are still in use, although they have moved to another context.

In our material, discussants strongly reject the narrative put forward by the #MeToo movement regarding sexual harassment and violence against women as a structural and political problem. Instead, perpetrators are described as individuals, whose actions cannot be blamed on men in general, and a recurring theme is women’s responsibility. Women are seen as responsible in several ways. It is the women who choose to gain career opportunities in exchange for sex, and who expose themselves to risks. They are also the ones who choose to associate with domineering and violent alpha males instead of the nice regular guys. Finally, women are also made responsible for the very existence of the perpetrators, where especially single mothers’ alleged exercise of power against their sons is said to lead them into hating women and growing up to become mass murderers and rapists. Thus, women bear the main responsibility for their oppression.

A theme that runs through a large part of the material is the narrative of men as victims of women’s increased power in society. It is especially clearly manifested in what can be called an incel discourse (Ging, 2019; Lindsay, 2021). In this discourse, women’s legal and economic emancipation have deprived men from access to sex. The discussions consistently focus on men’s experiences and feelings in relation to the claims of the Swedish #MeToo petitions. Discussants express a dissatisfaction with the Swedish #MeToo petition’s demand for collective responsibility, and what can be perceived as blaming men as a group, and instead emphasize that “not all men” are perpetrators—only a-typical men. These a-typical men are either found among a resourceful and feminized left-wing elite or are immigrants from the Middle East or North Africa. Unlike these a-typical perpetrators, the real men are white, Swedish, equal, working-class men, who take good care of their women without making a big fuss about it. This echoes a discourse that Farris (2017) calls femonationalism, where gender equality is connected to national identity, while other traditional values are maintained.

In the discussions, men often occur as victims of women’s sexual invitations, but above all feminists’ demonization of men. In this discourse, feminism becomes a gender war in which ordinary men and women become entangled. Similar to previous media descriptions of feminists, they are demonized and described as a kind of monstrous unwomanliness that has run amok (Ging & Siapera, 2018; Massanari & Chess, 2018).

In contrast to legacy media, women as victims of sexual harassment are seldom discussed, and when they are, they are often portrayed as someone who by their behaviour is to blame for the situation, because they were inappropriately dressed or in the wrong place. Blaming the victim by focusing on their appearance and personality, instead of discussing the issue at hand, is a commonly used anti-feminist tactic (Sundén & Paasonen, 2018). The real victims are the women who get abused by the a-typical perpetrators. The discussants argue that these real victims are largely ignored and made invisible by the pro-immigrant feminists, as this victim description does not fit into the feminists’ wish to suppress ordinary white men. This is a common discourse within the manosphere, where the influence of feminism in society is seen as a major problem, as it leads to a feminization of the state which makes it vulnerable to foreign powers. Defending the country against feminism is therefore urgent to protect society from perishing and being invaded by less civilized groups. Anti-feminism is thus linked to a higher purpose: to defend the nation-state against external threats (Blais & Dupuis-Déri, 2012; Maaranen & Tienari, 2020).

Flashback’s interface and netiquette carry ideas about deliberation as a way to develop public opinions and decrease polarization. However, when we compare the posts from the first phase in the beginning of the period, with those from the second phase at end of the year, we could not see how the discussion had brought different extreme positions together. Instead, the opinions had sharpened, and the conflicts had become more pronounced. The view of feminism had evolved, from being mentioned indirectly as something that discussants agreed they did not sympathize with, to being addressed directly and pointed out as the main problem. This can be seen as a discursive mobilization taking place, functioning as an inverted mirror for the development in mainstream media. Thus, at the same time as a feminist agenda became stronger in the mainstream media, various types of groups (ordinary men, incels, racists) were united in the idea that man-hating feminists were taking over.

In a larger perspective, the study points to how “feminism” becomes meaningful within circles where people feel frustration over contemporary society and culture. Feminism is here seen as responsible for individual failures, for immigration, and with an allegedly high crime rate and an overall catastrophic destabilization of the Swedish welfare society. In the #MeToo counter discourse, we can thus also read about a broader dissatisfaction with today’s political situation in Sweden, where inequalities between different classes of people have widened due to the globalization of the Swedish labour market and a gradual dismantling of the welfare state. This dissatisfaction is, in turn, channelled into, among other things, a hatred of feminism. Although this can be seen as a feminist backlash, it is interesting to note that equality is a cherished norm also in this discursive community. Furthermore, unlike previous portrayals of feminism, which diminished the movement and made it invisible, feminism in this context—while being hated—appears as a central and revolutionary force in society.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the Swedish Research Council [2018-01824_VR]; Vetenskapsrådet [2018-01824_VR].

Notes on contributors

Karin Hansson

Karin Hansson is a Professor of Media Technology, at the The School of Natural Sciences, Technology and Environmental Studies, Södertörn University, Sweden. Her research focus is technology-based participation from a critical design perspective.

Malin Sveningsson

Malin Sveningsson is a Professor of Communication Studies, at the Department of Journalism, Media and Communication, University of Gothenburg, Sweden. Her research concerns digital media and digital worlds, particularly in relation to social interaction, community, identity, gender and activism.

Hillevi Ganetz

Hillevi Ganetz is a Professor Emeritus of Gender Studies, at the Department of Ethnology, History of Religions and Gender Studies, Stockholm University, Sweden. Her research mainly focuses on the media’s—especially television’s—representations of gender, both masculinity and femininity.

Notes

1. Several petitions were explicitly addressed from “women and non-binary people”.

2. One important rule in this forum is to stay on topic. Moderators can move whole discussion threads to other sections if they think the content of the discussion have moved to other topics than was originally intended.