Cited by 17Gender and Feminist StudiesGender, Feminism, and MediaCrime, Deviance, and Social Control

Ressentiment in the Manosphere: Conceptions of Morality and Avenues for Resistance in the Incel Hatred Pipeline

Open access
Capelos, Tereza, Salmela, Mikko, Talalakina, Anastaseia, Cotena, Oliver·2024·Philosophies

Abstract

This article investigates conceptions of morality within the framework of ressentimentful victimhood in the manosphere, while also exploring avenues for resistance among young individuals encountering the “hatred pipeline”. In Study 1, we use the emotional mechanism of ressentiment to examine how incels construct narratives of victimhood rooted in the notion of sexual entitlement that remains owed and unfulfilled, alongside its “black pill” variant emphasising moral and epistemic superiority. Through a linguistic corpus analysis and content examination of 4chan and Incel.is blog posts, we find evidence of ressentiment morality permeating the language and communication within the incel community, characterised by blame directed at women, and the pervasive themes of victimhood, powerlessness, and injustice. In Study 2, we delve into young individuals’ reflections on incel morality and victimhood narratives as they engage with online networks of toxic masculinity in the manosphere. Drawing from semi-structured interviews with young participants who have accessed the manosphere, we explore their perceptions of risks, attribution of blame, and experiences of empathy towards individuals navigating the “hatred pipeline”. Our analysis underscores the significance of ressentiment in elucidating alternative conceptions of morality and victimhood, while shedding light on the potential for acceptance or resistance within online environments characterised by hatred.

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 · 10.3390/philosophies9020036

Cites

56 of 57 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 use of TFSV to shame girls reflects a framework where controlling women's bodies and reputations is central to maintaining male dominance, including through dehumanizing language.

    “The use of TFSV to shame girls reflects this framework, where controlling women's bodies and reputations is central to maintaining male dominance (Capelos et al. 2024), including through dehumanizing language, as highlighted in Zack's account.”

    From Technology-facilitated sexual violence perpetration as a tool for gender policing in secondary schools (2026) · cites this paper as Capelos et al. 2024

    The paper describes an incel belief in men's entitlement to dominate women, hostility to women's sexual autonomy, and the dehumanization of women (Additional information); its Results also document derogatory language about women. It does not examine TFSV used to shame girls or establish control of their reputations as a mechanism of male dominance. The application of that framework to TFSV therefore goes beyond what this source supports. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Slut-shaming predated the manosphere but is a particularly pervasive element of it and an important tool used to 'other' and dehumanize women.

    “While slut-shaming predated the manosphere, it is a particularly pervasive element of it and is an important tool used to 'other' and dehumanize women (Capelos et al. 2024).”

    From Technology-facilitated sexual violence perpetration as a tool for gender policing in secondary schools (2026) · cites this paper as Capelos et al. 2024

    The Study 2 methods passage lists slut-shaming among the misogynistic content participants encountered online, and the Introduction and Results describe the othering and dehumanization of women in incel communities. The paper does not establish that slut-shaming predates the manosphere, is particularly pervasive within it, or is specifically an important tool of that dehumanization. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 11

  1. Ling, R. Femcels: Are They Really the Female Equivalent of the Incel? Master's Thesis, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada, 2022.
  2. Halperin, E.; Schori-Eyal, N. Moral emotions in political decision making. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2019.
  3. Sevelsted, A., Toubøl, J., Eds.; Nonprofit and Civil Society Studies; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023.
  4. Kay, J.B. Abject desires in the age of anger: Incels, femcels and the gender politics of unfuckability. In Imagining" We" in the Age of" I"; Routledge: London, UK, 2021; pp. 29-46.
  5. Brogaard, B. Hatred: Understanding Our Most Dangerous Emotion; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2020.
  6. Nietzsche, F. Genealogy of Morals; Diethe, C., Translator; Original work published 1885; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1961.
  7. Scheler, M. Ressentiment; Coser, L.A., Translator; Original work published 1915; Marquette University Press: Milwaukee, WI, USA, 1961.
  8. Yankelovich, D. The status of ressentiment in America. Soc. Res. 1975, 42, 760-777.
  9. Kim, S.A. Social media algorithms: Why you see what you see. Georget. Law Technol. Rev. 2017, 2, 147-154.
  10. Illouz, E. The Emotional Life of Populism. How Fear, Disgust, Resentment, and Love Undermine Democracy; Polity: Cambridge, UK, 2023.
  11. Illouz, E. The End of Love: A Sociology of Negative Relations; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2019.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Capelos, T., Salmela, M., Talalakina, A., & Cotena, O.
Affiliations
  • University of Southampton (GB)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
Corresponding author
Capelos, Tereza
Venue
Philosophies
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2024-03-13
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
36
ISSN
2409-9287 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4392745406
Cited by
17
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1
FWCI
12.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Philosophies (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion, public-domain)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • European Union (101132560, 10108342, 832940)
  • UK’s government Horizon Europe Funding Guarantee (101132560, 10108342, 832940)
  • European Research Council (101132560, 10108342, 832940)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Feminism, and Media
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime, Deviance, and Social Control
Keywords
ressentiment, manosphere, incels, victimhood, morality, toxic masculinity, sexual entitlement, blame attribution, online communities, 4chan, resistance, empathy, youth

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