“Victims of feminism”: exploring networked misogyny and #MeToo in the manosphere

ABSTRACT

The manosphere is a detached set of websites and social media groups united by the belief that men are oppressed victims of feminism. Even though the manosphere has existed since the early 2000s, its activities have been arguably influenced and increased by the perceived need for counterbalancing the growth of online feminist discourses, such as those conveyed by #MeToo. By applying the theoretical lens of networked misogyny, this article explores the following research question: How is the #MeToo debate framed and discussed in the manosphere? The question is addressed through a qualitative thematic analysis of 12 articles and 641 comments about #MeToo written on the websites Return of Kings and A Voice for Men, which are part of the groups Pick-Up Artists and Men’s Right Movement, respectively. The analysis highlights some dominant themes: first, criticism and verbal abuse against women; second, dismissal of rape and description of #MeToo as a feminist conspiracy; third, perceived victimization of men and a desire to reestablish patriarchal values. This suggests that the manosphere is not a homogeneous network but a cluster of misogynist networks characterized by different viewpoints and degrees of violence, and entangled with racist, homophobic, and far-right ideologies.

KEYWORDS:

• Manosphere
• networked misogyny
• #MeToo
• popular feminism
• hate speech

Introduction

The creation and circulation of online misogynist narratives can have dreadful consequences. For example, in 2014 Elliot Rodger killed six people and injured fourteen by running amok in an attempt to “punish” women for rejecting him (Adam Nagourney, Michael Cieply, Alan Feuer, and Ian Lovett 2014). The intense social media use of Rodger, and his participation in anti-feminist online groups, shed light on the negative potential of the Internet to spread misogynist ideologies. Hence, the combination of gamer culture and geek communities with hypermasculinity may lead to toxic instances of anti-women harassment (Anastasia Salter and Bridget Blodgett 2012). These misogynistic narratives are connected to the so-called “manosphere,” a detached set of websites and social media groups united by the belief that men are oppressed victims of feminism (Tracie Farrell, Miriam Fernandez, Jakub Novotny, and Harith Alani 2019).

Even though the manosphere has existed since the early 2000s, its activities have been arguably influenced, shaped, and increased by the perceived need for counterbalancing the growth of online feminist discourses (Sarah Banet-Weiser 2018). In 2017, the hashtag #MeToo (invented in 2006 by activist Tarana Burke) gained social media attention, after actress Alyssa Milano encouraged women to share their experiences of sexual assault and harassment on Twitter (Rosemary Clark-Parsons 2019). Online activism is one of the characteristics of the fourth wave of feminism, which focuses on the need of achieving gender equality in an individualistic and often business-driven society. The increasing popularity of #MeToo-related narratives also attracted backlashes, including the aggressive anti-feminist discourses that characterize the manosphere.

In trying to counteract women’s activism, the manosphere can produce narratives and actions that are harmful to society at large. Aside from cases of physical violence such as the aforementioned attack perpetuated by Rodger, the manosphere is also connected to neo-Nazi, alt-right, and white supremacist groups, and often includes Islamophobic and racist ideologies (Giles Fraser 2016). However, despite its detrimental consequences, the manosphere is understudied in academic literature, especially when it concerns activities and narratives against feminist activism (Michael Waltman and John Haas 2010). Therefore, the present article explores the following question:

RQ: How is the #MeToo debate framed and discussed in the manosphere?

To address this question, we focus on two US-based online groups in the manosphere: Return of Kings (hereinafter ROK) and A Voice for Men (AVfM). They are blog-type websites regularly updated with articles from different authors, all including a comment section. While there is no indication of the number of visitors these websites attract, they have been identified by The Southern Poverty Law Center Hatewatch list among the first misogynistic websites (“Male Supremacy” n.d.). Being that the manosphere is often considered as a network, we would argue that it is opportune to analyze and compare two groups because they may hold different characteristics and various degrees of hostility and verbal violence. For instance, ROK, founded in 2012 by Daryush Valizadeh, known as Roosh V, explicitly blames women for allegedly “oppressing” men. Different from ROK, AVfM, founded in 2009 by Paul Elam, portrays itself as a website aiming to provide education and support for men. To explore the narratives that these two groups perpetuate, we will employ the theoretical lens of networked misogyny (Sarah Banet-Weiser and Kate M. Miltner 2016), discussed through a survey of previous literature in the first section of this article. We approach the manosphere by means of a thematic analysis of 12 articles and 641 comments published either by ROK or AVfM between 2017 and 2019 and mentioning #MeToo, as explained in the methodology section. This article will then proceed by describing the three predominant topics expressed in these websites: criticism and verbal abuse against women, dismissal of rape and description of #MeToo as a feminist conspiracy, perceived victimization of men and a desire to reestablish patriarchal values. In the conclusion, we will critically assess the notion of networked misogyny, reflecting on the impacts of the manosphere on society at large.

Misogyny, popular feminism, and the internet

The proliferation of online misogynist narratives is connected to sexist and anti-feminist groups acting also in offline venues, who often find a platform on the Internet to spread their narratives. In this section, we will explore the characteristics of misogynist groups in relation to the visibility of feminism, the affordances of the Internet that kindle the proliferation of anti-feminist discourses, and the theoretical framework of networked misogyny.

The manosphere is rooted in misogyny, a term that indicates extreme views against women. Misogyny is deeply embedded in patriarchal norms and social structures of power that create everyday instances of sexism (Kate Manne 2017). To clarify, sexism and misogyny are similar terms but not identical: sexism includes stereotypes against women and sexual objectification, but it is not necessarily violent. Misogyny may employ sexism in an attempt to “punish” women who are not perceived as conforming to patriarchal norms. Hence, misogyny is ingrained in systems of privilege that tend to target certain women, especially if they are not-white, not-heterosexual, and not-cisgender (Louise Richardson‐Self 2018). While misogyny has arguably existed throughout history as a system of oppression, the creation of men’s groups as an anti-feminist reactionary force dates back only a few decades. Among the most prominent examples of organized misogynist groups is the Men’s Rights Movement (MRM), which started in the 1970s (Michael A. Messner 1998). MRM can be conceptualized as a response to second-wave feminism, as it acknowledged the struggle of women but stressed that men also suffer under the pressure of the patriarchy. From this perspective, MRM was initially mainly concerned with protecting men’s rights in issues such as child custody in divorce laws (Bethany Coston and Michael Kimmel 2013).

However, the aim of the MRM rapidly shifted to counteract feminism and the alleged threats it poses to masculinity. Moreover, the MRM also started to primarily include white and heterosexual American men who often held anti-multiculturalist stances, and sought to protect white patriarchal culture (Michael Kimmel 2017). This ideology expanded and several other groups that reject feminism from different perspectives started to emerge. For instance, the “Red Pill philosophy” employs the movie “The Matrix” as a metaphor to claim that only a few men can see the alleged truth that women are not oppressed within society (Shawn P. Van Valkenburgh 2018). Incels are “involuntary celibates,” men who blame women for being rejected, as was the aforementioned case of Rodger (Sylvia Jaki, et al. 2019). Pick-up Artists portray themselves as dating coaches, and in so doing often dehumanize and abuse women, while Men Going Their Own Way choose to reduce their relationships with women to the bare minimum (Alan Grant 2019). The two websites that are analyzed in this article, ROK and AVfM, represent Pick-Up Artists and MRM, respectively, but, as discussed in the following sections, hold also some characteristics of other groups. These different groups became the emblem of a type of misogyny that acts as a counterforce to feminism: while feminism seeks social change, groups such as the MRM constitute a reactionary force to maintain the patriarchal status quo.

Anti-feminist groups find a fertile terrain in Internet spaces and constitute the so-called manosphere. Generally speaking, the Internet can facilitate the diffusion of hate speech because it is anonymous, allows for transnational connections, and fosters impulsive and fast responses (Alexander Brown 2018). Furthermore, Internet connections can create antagonistic and emotional relations and facilitate group polarization, due to algorithmic logic and lack of regulations on several platforms (Giulia Evolvi 2017; Merlyna Lim 2017; Sarita Yardi and Danah Boyd 2010). Therefore, extremist groups have been among the early adopters of the Internet to find like-minded people, circumvent censorship, and avoid consequences for spreading verbal violence (Phyllis B. Gerstenfeld, Diana R. Grant and Chau-Pu Chiang 2003). This includes misogynist groups, which often employ the Internet to reassert male dominance despite their lack of social and economic capital in everyday lives (Debbie Ging and Eugenia Siapera 2018), and who spread homophobic, racist, and violent language (Farrell et al. 2019).

Misogyny is spread online because of the affordances of the Internet, but also as a reaction to the visibility of online feminism. Hence, fourth-wave feminism is conditioned by the possibilities offered by Internet technologies, and it is often connected with self-promotion, business opportunities, and empowering narratives (Sarah Banet-Weiser, Rosalind Gill and Catherine Rottenberg 2019). This creates a type of networked feminism characterized by an heterogeneity of movements and goals, and based on the performance of Internet visibility, as happens with #MeToo (Rosemary Clark-Parsons 2019). The diffusion of #MeToo has been explored in its influence on media reporting of sexual harassment and consent (Sophie Hindes and Bianca Fileborn 2020), as well as in relation to feminist conversations in various parts of the world (Lindsey E. Blumell and Dinfin Mulupi 2020; Sharmila Lodhia 2020; Siyuan Yin and Yu Sun 2020). Women increasingly using the Me Too hashtag to denounce men’s behavior provoked the rise of paranoia among certain groups, whose members fear being accused by feminist activists. Narratives trying to counteract #MeToo often portray men as victims, insisting on the alleged negative impact of feminism on men’s self-esteem and masculinity. As a result, the manosphere intensifies its actions to contrast the perceived threat of online feminism and the need of reasserting masculinity (Jonathan A. Allan 2016).

The term “networked misogyny” is used to describe the proliferation of groups connected to the manosphere, with a focus on its opposition to popular feminism (Banet-Weiser et al. 2016). Sarah Banet-Weiser (2018) situates misogynist ideologies within the growing trend of Internet narratives aimed at making women more confident and empowered. As networked feminism seeks mutual support and creates online connections, networked misogyny similarly tries to create a toxic support system for men to spread sexist narratives in online and offline settings. Drawing from the framework of online misogyny, (Alice E. Marwick and Robyn Caplan 2018) explain how the manosphere is networked in spreading ideologies that criminalize women and feminism. For instance, several misogynist platforms employ “misandry” as a buzzword to accuse feminists of discriminating against men, in discourses whose circulation drastically increased because of the networking potential of social media. An example of networked misogyny is the narratives surrounding the hashtag #HimToo, which aimed at supporting Brett Kavanaugh during his hearings when accused of sexual harassment by Christine Blasey Ford (Karen Boyle and Chamil Rathnayake 2019). #HimToo shows how networked misogyny, differently from popular feminism, is embedded in patriarchal narratives that have been long normalized within society. Hence, misogyny does not only exist online and its popularity is not only the result of technological developments but it mirrors pervasive social discourses. While the manosphere might give the impression of only including a few extremists, online sexism needs to be understood as a diffused ideology (Banet-Weiser 2018).

Employing the framework of networked misogyny, we would argue that the networked character of the manosphere needs to be considered in its heterogeneity. Exactly as networked feminism is a global phenomenon that includes various feelings and different types of activism, online misogyny involves narratives that may target various social groups, rather than simply being an anti-feminist force. To explore networked misogyny in the manosphere, we focus on two specific websites: ROK and AVfM.

Exploring networked misogyny

The websites of the two groups ROK and AVfM have been explored by means of qualitative textual analysis. Through this approach, it is possible to identify discursive patterns and predominant narrative frameworks (Margrit Schreier 2012). In particular, a manually coded qualitative thematic analysis allowed exploring the data in-depth and analyzing the interactions among users. Thematic analysis has already been used to analyze online comments about masculinity, and to detect discursive patterns in a post-#MeToo digital sphere (Verity Anne Trott 2020). We describe here below the sample collection and the thematic analysis process.

Sample

This research aims to analyze how #MeToo is represented within the manosphere, both in articles and comments. Because the movement gained popularity in October 2017, articles and comments taken into account have been published in the period from October 24^th, 2017, to April 7^th, 2019. Through a purposive sample, we selected articles from the websites ROK and AVfM following three criteria. First, they needed to refer to the #MeToo movement. AVfM has a specific section with articles dedicated to #MeToo, while on ROK it was possible to do a keyword search. Second, because articles on these websites are sometimes available in multiple languages, we only selected those in English. Considering that networked misogyny is a global phenomenon, articles in English are likely to attract greater user engagement internationally. Third, articles needed to be originally created for ROK or AVfM, and not re-posts from other platforms. This ensured that we captured the original point of view of the websites’ authors and users. Applying these criteria, seven articles from ROK and five articles from AVfM have been selected. Articles’ length may vary, but they are often between 1000 and 2200 words long.

ROK generally attracts a higher number of comments than AVfM, so the #MeToo-related articles on the two websites generated, respectively, 664 and 128 comments (as of March 23^rd, 2020). However, after a first reading, only comments about the discussion on #MeToo have been taken into account. It is for this reason that we created a list of keywords to sample relevant comments. Some alternative terminology often employed in comments that refer to these keywords has also been identified while reading articles and comments, as illustrated in Table 1. There is likely no moderation of censorship in these two websites. We chose to reproduce quotes from the original articles and comments even if they often contain abusive and violent language.

Table 1. Keywords as sampling criteria for comments.

Keywords	Alternative terminology
Woman, girl, (house-)wife, female, femininity	(Ameri-)cunt, whore, slut, bitch, witch
Man, boy, husband, male, masculinity	Guy, plebe, alpha, beta, cuck, dude
Feminism, feminist	Feminazi, social justice warrior, SJW
#MeToo, movement	Hashtag MeToo, PoundMeToo, MeToo, (#MeToo) Wehrmacht, (#MeToo) inquisition
Sex, sexual, harassment, assault, abuse, rape, consent, allegation, victim
Patriarchy, gynocentrism, gender

The selection took into account comments that contain such keywords or alternative terminology. Furthermore, duplicate comments have been eliminated. As a result, the final data sample consisted of 12 articles and 641 comments, as shown in Table 2. Articles and comments are all publicly available on the website and are signed with usernames that protect users’ anonymity, which we also reproduced in this article to indicate the authors of the opinions we report. From their comments on the website, it is not possible to discern any demographic information of these users, and we avoided quoting personal stories shared in the comments.

Table 2. Number of articles and comments selected for analysis for each website.

	Articles	Comments
Return of Kings	7	531
A Voice for Men	5	110
Total	12	641

Qualitative thematic analysis

Thematic analysis has been chosen because it allows for identifying core themes within a heterogeneous and relatively large sample by following clear coding rules (Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke 2006). Since articles and comments are predominantly text-based, the analysis only focused on written words and did not take pictures into account. We conducted a coding process divided into four steps. First, we familiarized ourselves with the data by reading through the data sample and taking initial notes. Second, after comparing and categorizing the data, the first set of codes was generated. While codes were initially descriptive, they were subsequently grouped together in interpretative codes. Third, we identified patterns within the codes and created 27 mutually exclusive categories. Codes and categories each cover a unique aspect and have been analyzed until saturation was reached. Finally, these categories have been grouped into six overarching themes, as illustrated by Table 3.

Table 3. Categories and themes as created after a thematic analysis of the data.

	Themes	Categories
Networked misogyny and the description of women	Portrayal of women	Nature of women Appearance of women
	Rational examination of #MeToo	Balanced perspective Explanations for abuse
Sexual violence and consequences for men	Cultural impact of #MeToo	Cultural differences Minorities benefit from #MeToo Hollywood
	Feminist propaganda	Credibility of accusations Legal system Double standard Effects of feminism Media Superficiality of #MeToo Power struggle Political agenda Conspiracy theories Changes over time
Bringing back patriarchal roles: the portrayal of the “ideal” man	Reestablishing the patriarchy	End the oppression Coping Protective measures Justifications for misogyny Intolerance
	Role of men	Exclusion of men Men as victims of feminism Male supporters Differences between men Self-reflection

The first theme, “portrayal of women,” focuses on criticism against women. The second theme, “Rational examination of #MeToo,” includes narratives that dismiss rape allegations and criticize #MeToo activists. The third theme, “Cultural impact of #MeToo,” involves discourses about #MeToo through a white supremacist lens. The fourth theme, “Feminist propaganda,” is about descriptions of feminism and #MeToo as a conspiracy against men. The fifth theme, “Reestablishing the patriarchy,” groups narratives about the perceived nostalgia for a society where men had more prominent roles. Finally, the sixth theme, “Role of men,” shows how these websites describe men as victims of feminism. As shown in Table 3, we have merged the themes in groups of two to better report them in the following sections.

Results and discussion

The thematic analysis of the dataset suggests that the websites ROK and AVfM discuss similar topics, and that their articles predominantly focus on the role of men and women within society, as well as on the criticism of feminism and movements such as #MeToo. While there are common themes in both websites, the analysis also highlighted some differences. Narratives on ROK tend to use racial slurs and curse words more frequently, and they are more overtly misogynist. ROK also advocates more explicitly for violence against women. In contrast, AVfM presents itself as a website that creates a support system for men, and it is primarily focused on abuse against men. Nonetheless, AVfM is misogynist in presenting women’s submission and the demise of feminism as the only solution to men’s problems. The articles on both websites tend to combine news stories and statistical claims (often without evidence), with personal opinions. Comments tend to be more hostile and abusive than the articles, and users often respond and build on each other’s opinions.

The following sections will describe the predominant themes found in ROK and AVfM’s articles and comments. The first section will focus on the themes “Portrayal of women” and “Cultural impact of #MeToo,” showing how these websites describe the desirable and undesirable feminine traits for the manosphere. The second section will include the themes “Rational examination of #MeToo” and “Feminist propaganda,” which focus on how these websites frame feminism and sexual violence in relation to #MeToo, as well as their consequences for men. Then, the third section will analyze the themes “Reestablishing the patriarchy” and “Role of Men,” which explain how people in the manosphere consider themselves as “victims” of feminism.

Networked misogyny and the description of women

The users of the websites ROK and AVfM often criticize women for both their physical appearance and for their behaviors and ideas. The analysis of posts shows how the discussion of #MeToo is closely connected to a general criticism of women and feminism. Several articles and comments distinguish between women who are supposedly “desirable” and those who are not, often in narratives charged with racism and sexual stereotypes. In this section, we will analyze some of the quotes that pertain to the themes “Portrayal of women” and “Cultural impact of #MeToo.”

Women, in the articles and posts, are often shamed for their physical appearance. In particular, #MeToo is associated with women who are feminists because they are supposedly unattractive, following a common anti-feminist trope (Rita Kirk Whillock and David Slayden 1995). This tendency is exemplified by a user discussing #MeToo in the following terms:

I have exactly zero attractive girls posting this [#MeToo posts] on my news feeds. I noticed immediately it was only the ugly and fat ones posting it and I figure these girls are probably just trying to deal with rejection issues. (Meriwether, comment, ROK, 2017)

This type of discourse minimizes the impact of rape and associates it with attractiveness. As the comment above suggests, members of the manosphere describe the #MeToo movement as a ploy of unattractive women to gain attention and “deal with rejection issues.” This categorizes feminist women and women who denounce sexual violence as undesirable and frustrated, while at the same time refusing to consider the experience of sexual violence. Together with comments that ridicule #MeToo activists and shame them for their physical appearance, some narratives portray women as intellectually inferior, or mentally unstable. They claim that the supposed “inferiority” of women is founded in philosophy and biology, and in some cases even claim that women should have not been given the right to vote. Besides, some of the users spread conspiracy theories claiming that women are practitioners of satanism and witchcraft, and go as far as proposing new witch hunts. Other comments describe women as abusers and pedophiles, as the following quote illustrates:

[…] the majority of sexual abuses of children, especially boys will be committed by women, which is our worlds [sic] most dirty of secrets. This secret is held, because the world is not yet ready to deal with the truth when it comes to the evil that women do. And by that I mean the evil that the overwhelming majority of women do. (Shrek6, comment, AVfM, 2019a)

According to such comments, women abuse men, and young boys in particular, because they are supposedly not held accountable for their actions. As the user “Shrek6” writes, most women commit “evil” acts but the legal system allegedly protects them. While these types of comments rarely include references or sources, the two websites, and AVfM in particular, often present women’s abuse against men as a factual and structural problem. In discussing such issues in relation to #MeToo, these narratives not only ridicule feminism and minimize rape but change the terms of the conversation: women are perpetrators against men, and men need to protect each other against women. Following this line of reasoning, #MeToo is part of a conspiracy to protect women who commit evil acts, and men are the actual victims of the legal and social system.

Although narratives about the #MeToo movement tend to criticize all women, some are more subject to verbal violence, in narratives that show the entanglement of the manosphere’s belief in white supremacy. For instance, Tarana Burke, the African-American activist who launched the #MeToo movement, is often targeted with racial slurs. While these two websites’ users are openly racist against black women, they also generally belittle white women in so-called Western countries by describing them as aggressive feminists. This is also probably due to the fact that white women in North America and Western Europe create relatively visible online feminist networks, which attract greater anti-feminist backlashes in the manosphere (Banet-Weiser 2018). Many narratives within the two websites, indeed, claim that the most desirable women are those who are submissive and not feminist. Several users comment that they favor Asian women over white women:

Most white guys that I see […] are with Asians. Hitting on any white women in the ‘Western’ hemisphere while ‘white’ and ‘hetero’ gets you a pass around the Monopoly board of life again, again, and again. The type of guys I see feminists, or in general, young white women with are emaciated, emo white faggots, blacks, and fat headed, diminutive Hispanics. (FuckYouToo, comment, ROK, 2018)

This comment shows how misogyny can be deeply entangled with racism and homophobia, particularly prominent on ROK. White feminist women allegedly favor men who are non-white or who do not display what are perceived as masculine traits. The fact that these are considered “inferior” underscores the white supremacist and homophobic character of ROK and AVfM. It is important to notice that white women are sometimes blamed as allegedly “white supremacists”: according to this view, white women refuse to date men of colour but also seek to erase white men. This shows that there are contradictory narratives on these websites. In any case, criticism against white women leads to men favoring non-white women. As described in the quote, Asian women are the only suitable partners for men who share the set of values perpetuated by the manosphere, because of being allegedly submissive. It is interesting to note how users of these two websites insinuate that women, and especially white women, are feminist because they are unattractive and violent, and simultaneously lament being rejected by them.

Therefore, ROK and AVfM display verbal abuse against all women, for both their physical appearance and their supposedly “evil” behaviors, while also targeting some groups with racist and homophobic narratives. This suggests that members of these groups try to portray themselves as victims, allegedly suffering both from women’s violence and their sexual unavailability. This confirms the claims of Sarah Banet-Weiser and Kate Miltner (2016), who assert that networked misogyny is often perpetuated by men who do not conform to the standards of hegemonic masculinity, but rather, are considered not conventionally attractive. From this perspective, some narratives might resemble those of incel groups that blame and belittle women for rejecting certain types of men. Furthermore, framing submissive women as desirable implies a common desire of the manosphere to “punish” feminists and make them more malleable (Kate Manne 2017). These topics emerge in narratives about feminist activism and sexual violence as well.

Sexual violence and consequences for men

Discussions about #MeToo on ROK and AVfM tend to focus on two main points. First, they dismiss denounces of sexual violence, which are often minimized or confuted. Second, they lament the possible negative consequences of the #MeToo movement for men. This section focuses on these two topics, illustrating the themes “Rational examination of #MeToo” and “Feminist propaganda.”

The general perception of #MeToo on these two websites is that women’s stories and accounts are not trustworthy, as mentioned also in the previous section. For instance, several comments indicate that women exaggerate their reactions after episodes of sexual violence:

[…] women today carry on like they’ve had their throat cut when some guy grabs them on the butt or does a Donald Trump and grabs them on the other side. They scream rape and demand to have the man locked up for life. My elderly mother gets angry about this. She recons [sic] the man should never go to prison for being part of the ‘wandering hands society’. (Shrek6, comment, AVfM, 2019b)

According to this perspective, men should not be punished for certain types of sexual harassment and women overreact about them. In the case of this comment, the reference to the “elderly mother” might function as a way to legitimize a certain traditional and conservative masculinity, as well as a nostalgia for a past where women would not denounce sexual abuse. Further, it is a criticism of the visibility of #MeToo and to women’s decision of sharing stories instead of remaining silent. This type of narrative is sometimes found in comments where men denounce the fact that they can also be victims of violence, but their stories are often overlooked. Instead of demanding justice for both male and female victims, users engaging in these discourses seem to claim that women do not have the right to talk until the problem of violence against men is addressed and solved. These different approaches to sexual violence often lead to descriptions of rape as not harmful:

[…] why is rape “bad”? […] In our modern Western culture girls have lay counts in the double and triple digits, what does an extra dick matter […]? Sex feels good and women who are being raped can also orgasm, implying an element of enjoyment. Finally, if women never fought back it would not be fun for the guy as many violent rapes are a power thing where the guy enjoys the woman fighting back. (DevilsAdvocate, comment, ROK, 2018).

This comment builds on some common misogynist tropes of victim-shaming. On the one hand, there is the idea that women who have many partners “deserve” to become victims of rape. On the other hand, this comment suggests that women enjoy being sexually assaulted if they do not “fight back.” In some other comments, users claim that the notion of consent is confusing, and that women should be blamed if they are not able to clearly say no and stand up for themselves when sexually attacked. Minimizing sexual abuse and framing rape as the victim’s fault does not deny that men are sexual predators and perpetrators, but excuses their behavior as supposedly not harmful. It is interesting to notice how, as described in the previous section, women are often blamed as abusers of young boys, but sexual violence against women is considered legitimate.

These narratives about sexual abuse and rape lead to a second point, which is about the possible consequences of #MeToo for men. Disregarding that the difficulty of providing hard evidence to prove rape accusations is why many women in the past did not share their experiences, several users point out that #MeToo only emerged recently as a conspiracy to destroy the lives of men. Hence, #MeToo seems to cause a moral panic among men who fear they might suffer consequences. This is summarized by the following quote:

We’ve all seen the horror stories. Men work their entire lives to build a legacy, and then with one fell swoop, a mere allegation, with zero proof to back it up, destroys their lives. (Anthony, article, AVfM, 2019)

This approach claims that the #MeToo movement can potentially destroy men’s lives. While users of these two websites usually do not deny men’s involvement in cases of sexual abuse, they lament the supposedly inquisitory character of #MeToo. Sometimes the movement is deemed a “Wehrmacht” which allegedly seeks to establish the domain of women over man. This narrative is present in several comments that, for instance, complain that women cause men to lose their jobs, and consequently their career and financial income, by denouncing sexual harassment. This is also connected to the framework of networked misogyny (Banet-Weiser and Miltner 2016), often characterized by men lamenting that emancipation of women causes job losses for men, something considered against the patriarchal order. Once again, these discourses try to reverse roles and present men as victims of feminism instead of women as victims of sexual violence.

Such articles and comments also mirror the incel culture within the manosphere, because they blame women for their sexual unavailability (Sylvia Jaki, Tom De Smedt, Maja Gwóźdź, Rudresh Panchal, Alexander Rossa, and Guy De Pauw 2019). Describing #MeToo as exaggerating the nature of sexual violence and trying to destroy men’s lives, narratives on ROK and AVfM imply that it is also a ploy of women to reject men. In addition, men lament the fact that the visibility of #MeToo complicates their likelihood of approaching women. It is important to notice that, while these narratives are widespread on the two websites, they are not always homogeneous. In some cases, users blame men who cannot distinguish consensual sex from rape, or justify sexual abuse on the basis of one’s inability to control his sex drive, or describe rape as the result of past trauma. Nonetheless, these discourses suggest a view of masculinity that refuses to consider the seriousness of rape allegations, and sees #MeToo as primarily damaging men instead of giving women a voice. This also results in reflections on the role of men and masculinity in contemporary societies.

Bringing back patriarchal roles: the portrayal of the “ideal” man

The criticism of women and feminism and the discussion of the consequences of #MeToo for men, as described in the previous two sections, result in narratives that seek to reestablish a type of hegemonic masculinity that confers social power exclusively to men. These discourses focus, first, on the alleged victimization of white men and, second, on the possible ways of changing society. In this section, we will illustrate the themes “Role of Men” and “Reestablishing the patriarchy.”

The description of #MeToo as a conspiracy against white men further underscores how members of ROK and AVfM try to present themselves as discriminated against. Some narratives claim that feminists not only try to undermine white men but they are also changing power hierarchies within society. A comment condemning this phenomenon says:

The end goal is […] [to] eliminate the class of people that were able to build the most successful Democratic Republic in history, the European white male, and replace him with classes of people that have lower IQs and are more malleable. (Chrish, comment, ROK, 2018)

This user claims that #MeToo is a ploy to “eliminate” straight white men by depriving them of their privileges. Once again, racism and homophobia are entangled with sexism in narratives that design white men as superior to women, members of the LGBTQ+ community, and racial and ethnic minorities. The “superiority” of white men is motivated by their historical achievements, and by the perceived need of maintaining existing power balances and the social status quo. The alleged threats posed by feminism are contrasted by narratives that suggest ways to reestablish patriarchal norms:

What I’ve yet to hear, thus far, is a flat out “FUCK YOU I’m fighting this” from those who have been accused. I believe this is what needs to happen. […] And I believe this will turn the tide on the false accusations, faulty accusations, and hysteria that #metoo has inflicted on men. (Reed Rothchild, comment, ROK, 2017)

This comment echoes other narratives that support the idea of men “fighting” against the visibility of #MeToo and feminism. Both ROK and AVfM, indeed, perpetuate the idea that members of the manosphere need to unite and create a counter-revolution. The manosphere is often described as a network (Banet-Weiser 2018), but these websites’ users lament the inability of men to unite for a common goal. While the manosphere counteracts online feminism, here it mirrors activist movements and networked feminism in trying to mobilize members and create concrete social change. Together with calls to fight feminism, some comments also include practical actions that men should supposedly take:

Even a sexual consent form would never hold up in court if the women said she felt pressured to sign the form. Don’t bother gentleman. Just record every sexual excapade [sic] session by audio, or video, or both, if legal in your jurisdiction. Even most other females find it hard to convict when they see a woman whom clearly wanted it and was quite literally asking for it. (The one armed bandit, comment, ROK, 2017b)

In this case, the user suggests men record women during sexual intercourse without their consent to protect themselves against rape allegations. Hence, it shows the troubling and dangerous character of the manosphere, where it is often suggested to commit crimes or manipulations. Some arrive as far as justifying violence and murder against women in an attempt to punish them and to prevent them from denouncing men. These narratives are present on both websites but are more pervasive and openly racist and homophobic on ROK.

Therefore, in the narratives found on the websites ROK and AVfM there is a strong sense of victimization in describing white straight men as allegedly superior but also under threat by feminism. Confirming the argument of (Banet-Weiser and Miltner 2016), narratives that characterize networked misogyny are entangled with racism and white supremacism, and consider the growth of feminism as detrimental for men. This type of victimization can assume various forms: women’s rejection of sexual advances, allegations of sexual harassment and rape, and the overall ploy to make white men lose their social privileges and power. Discourses that address practical actions against #MeToo activism point to a potential role of these websites in fomenting violence and promoting radicalization, as happened with Rodger’s attempt to “punish” women for being sexually unavailable. The description of masculine and feminine roles and the criticism of female activism show that the manosphere supports a specific view of masculinity but at the same time hosts heterogeneous narratives about contemporary society.

The manosphere: an online network or a misogynist cluster?

This article explored the online narratives of the manosphere to understand how members of misogynist groups frame the visibility of #MeToo. By focusing on the websites A Voice for Men and Return of Kings, we aimed at analyzing instances of hate speech and considered the affordances of the Internet in the spreading of anti-feminist narratives. The focus on #MeToo allows understanding online misogyny against the growing visibility of Internet-based feminism. A thematic analysis of 12 articles and 641 comments suggests that there are some dominant narratives in the two websites, characterized by verbal abuse against women, criticism of #MeToo, and praise of patriarchal values.

The analysis confirms some findings of previous literature. First, the popularity of the #MeToo movement and the consequent notion that men need to be held accountable for their actions seems to kindle further verbal violence in these groups (Banet-Weiser 2018). In particular, many misogynist narratives dismiss the idea that empowered and feminist women can also be victims of rape, suggesting that sexual violence allegations are part of a conspiracy of popular feminism. Second, members of these groups consider themselves as victims of feminism, challenging and reversing the #MeToo narrative that describes women as victims of men’s violence (Jonathan A. Allan 2016). According to this viewpoint, women try to subvert the status quo at the expense of men, and they need to be punished and made once again submissive. As a consequence, the protection of women and condemnation of sexual violence is equated with an attack on men, and misogynist narratives are described as attempts to counteract feminist misandry. Third, online misogyny seems to be deeply connected with racism, homophobia, and white supremacism, and the affordances of the Internet contribute to the spread of hate speech (Gerstenfeld et al. 2003). Women and minorities are essentialized as different and inferior from men, in an attempt to support the idea that straight white men should be the dominant social group.

The theoretical framework of networked misogyny (Banet-Weiser and Miltner 2016) is useful to understand some facets of the manosphere, but our study also highlighted that it is important to consider the discursive heterogeneity within websites such as ROK and AVfM. Hence, the findings show that the ideologies of the different groups that constitute the manosphere—MRM, Red Pill philosophy, Men Going Their Own Way, Pick-Up Artists—often overlap. ROK and AVfM, hold similar ideologies even if they pertain to different groups, MRM and Pick-Up Artists. Besides, both websites present some narratives that resemble those of other groups, such as the incels, in blaming women for rejecting men. This suggests that the manosphere employs the Internet to exchange opinions and create a network of ideas, and that the same group often employs heterogeneous narratives. Furthermore, the discourses on ROK and AVfM are not always coherent. To give an example, narratives on sexual violence span from men who condemn rape to those openly advocating for murder and physical aggressions, as discussed in the previous section of this article. This suggests that the manosphere is an interconnected spectrum of misogyny that groups heterogeneous opinions and voices. From this perspective, online misogyny seems to mirror networked feminism in trying to connect and mobilize members of different groups, and for being a movement characterized by a plethora of different opinions. Therefore, we would argue that it is important to consider the heterogeneity of the manosphere and not describe it as a confined network with a unique ideology. It may be considered as a cluster of networks where different individuals maintain their identities and interact with each other, without necessarily agreeing on a common purpose. At the same time, this cluster includes connections with far-right and white supremacist groups, highlighting an entanglement of different ideologies beyond misogyny. This article was limited to the in-depth analysis of two websites and their #MeToo-related narratives, but future research might further explore this cluster of misogynist networks by comparing more websites or looking at discourses on other topics.

This plethora of overlapping anti-feminist discourses is facilitated by the affordances of the Internet, which allows websites like ROK and AVfM to attract members and give them a voice. However, it is important to consider the potential offline impacts of such discourses, and their influence on society at large. While violent individuals such as Elliot Rodger might not constitute the majority of these websites’ users, misogynist discourses can result in abusive dynamics, the non-consensual recording of sexual encounters, and the ignorance of consent definitions, just to mention some examples. The differences between the two websites can also lead to different consequences. While ROK is more explicitly violent and therefore more potentially dangerous, AVfM presents itself as an unharmful support system. Nonetheless, AVfM remains deeply misogynist and its moderate tones can potentially attract more men who seek an online community and mutual support, and exacerbate their sexist ideas, contributing to the diffusion of misogynist narratives within society. In doing so, and as also highlighted by Banet-Weiser et al. (2016), it naturalizes misogyny as an acceptable narrative. Therefore, it is important that misogynist websites are criticized and blocked not only when they are explicitly violent but also when they suggest implicitly detrimental ideologies that can nonetheless result in violent act, as the one committed by Eliot Rodgers. This study only focused on online discourses, but other studies might explore the connections between different platforms, as well as the actions in physical spaces of groups belonging to the manosphere. Furthermore, everyday sexism is constantly challenged by feminist activism. The Internet can offer venues to organize protests and campaigns to empower women and enhance women’s voices (Hester Baer 2016), something that can lessen the danger of misogynist discourses for society. Hence, further studies can also focus on how online feminist activism contrasts networked misogyny and on the techniques they use to counteract sexism. This article highlights some characteristics of networked misogyny, showing its nuanced character, and suggesting that it does not only involve a few fringe groups but it is a pervasive and dangerous phenomenon.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for the useful comments and feedback.

Disclosure statement

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

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Valerie Dickel

Valerie Dickel is a trainee in Media Planning and Consulting at mediascale GmbH & Co. KG in Munich, Germany. She received her master’s degree in Media & Business from the Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Her interests lie with the affordances of digital media for social movements and the impact of media and brands on personal identities and public perceptions E-mail: [email protected]

Giulia Evolvi

Giulia Evolvi is a lecturer in Media and Communication at Erasmus University, Rotterdam. She obtained her Ph.D. at the University of Colorado Boulder and worked at Ruhr University in Germany. Her research interests are religion, media, and gender; digital religion; online hate speech. In 2018, Giulia published the book “Blogging my religion: secular, Muslim, and Catholic media spaces in Europe” with Routledge E-mail: [email protected]