CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 99Gender Roles and Identity StudiesGender and Feminist StudiesGender, Feminism, and Media

Hegemonic Masculinities in the ‘Manosphere’: A Thematic Analysis of Beliefs About Men and Women on The Red Pill and Incel

Open access
Vallerga, Michael, Zurbriggen, Eileen L.·2022·Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy
DOI 10.1111/asap.12308
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Websites, blogs, and message boards of the “manosphere” are dedicated to a worldview that celebrates hegemonic masculinity and decries feminism. In a reflexive thematic analysis of 227 posts (389,189 words) from two manosphere message boards (The Red Pill and Incel), we analyzed how posters viewed women and men. We found that beliefs about women and men formed an ideology comprised of (a) evolution‐based views of gender essentialism, (b) an informal psychology of women's motivations, and (c) a typology of men. Women were seen as having three primary motives: to deceive and manipulate men, to promiscuously satisfy their own sexual needs, and to trade sex for power. Men were seen as falling into two (The Red Pill) or three (Incel) types: alpha men who are attractive, powerful, and sexually successful, beta men who give to women as their only route to sexual interactions, and incel (involuntarily celibate) men who are too unattractive to achieve sexual success. Posters acted on these beliefs either to improve themselves (The Red Pill) or give up on life and endorse suicide and/or violence (Incel). We discuss these beliefs and actions in relation to theories of sexual aggression, the psychology of radicalization, and the American Psychological Association's Guidelines for Psychological Practice with Boys and Men .

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/asap.12308

Cites

49 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The discourse on incel message boards is largely characterized by misogynistic, homophobic and racist content, which has been the impetus for real-world violence.

    “the discourse on incel message boards is largely characterized by misogynistic (as well as homophobic and racist) content, which has undoubtedly been the impetus for real-world violence, as well as being violent in its own right (see Ging 2019 ;Vallerga and Zurbriggen 2022 ).”

    From Agency and authority: A differentiated model of hermeneutical power (2025) · cites this paper as Vallerga and Zurbriggen 2022

    The Conclusion describes the Incel board’s misogynistic ideology, and “Incel and violent extremism” reports that posters validate violence and encourage mass violence. The paper does not establish that the discourse was undoubtedly the impetus for real-world attacks, and the passages found do not characterize the board’s content as homophobic or racist. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Vallerga and Zurbriggen (2022) argue that incels support hegemonic masculinity by advocating for men's sexual domination of women.

    “For instance, Vallerga and Zurbriggen (2022) argue that incels support hegemonic masculinity by advocating for men's sexual domination of women”

    From Stochastic Gender-Based Violence: How Incels Justify and Encourage Sexualized Violence Against Women (2025) · cites this paper as Vallerga and Zurbriggen, 2022

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Connell, R. (2005). Masculinities (2nd Edition). Berkeley: University of California Press.
  2. Ging, D. (2019). Alphas, betas, and incels: theorizing the masculinities of the manosphere. Men and Masculinities, 22(4), 638-657. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184/17706401 · DOI
  3. Matthews, C. (2014). Biology ideology and pastiche hegemony. Men and Masculinities, 17(2), 99-119. https://doi. org/10.1177/1097184/14526699 · DOI
  4. Preston, K., Halpin, M., & Maguire, F. (2021). The black pill: new technology and the male supremacy of involun- tarily celibate men. Men and Masculinities, 24 (5), 823-841. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184/211017954 · DOI
  5. Van Valkenburgh, S. (2018). Digesting the red pill: masculinity and neoliberalism in the manosphere. Men and Masculinities, 24 1, 84-103. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184/18816118. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Vallerga, M., & Zurbriggen, E. L.
Affiliations
University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
Corresponding author
Vallerga, Michael
ORCID
Venue
Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-04
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
602-625
ISSN
  • 1529-7489 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-2415
DOI
10.1111/asap.12308
OpenAlex
W4220784985
Cited by
99
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1
FWCI
21.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Feminism, and Media
Keywords
manosphere, hegemonic masculinity, incels, gender essentialism, sexual aggression, radicalization, suicide, violence, feminism, online message boards, psychology of men

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review