Where Wayward Sons Wander To and Wonder Fro

Introduction

How do loosely connected online communities shape young men’s views on gender and mental health, and what does scientific analysis say about these ideas?

“Gender equality is everyone’s business.”
— Lakshmi Puri, former Deputy Executive Director, UN Women

“Resentment is like drinking poison and then hoping it will kill your enemies.”
— Nelson Mandela

“All that anxiety and anger, those dubious good intentions, those tangled lives, that blood. I can tell about it or I can bury it. In the end, we’ll all become stories. Or else we’ll become entities. Maybe it’s the same.”

— Margaret Atwood, Moral Disorder and Other Stories (2006)

Kaleidoscope and Scrambled Eggs

We need new stories.

Across the spectrum, from mainstream feminist blogs to incel sub-forums, we’re failing boys and young men in societies in transition. Mostly everyone is arguing about why gender feels unsettled and whose story explains it. Our heuristics, epistemic systems, and hermeneutics, are failing to derive functional and pragmatic ontics, because we don’t see what’s happening accurately.

Much of the so-called ‘Manosphere’ comprises diverse elements that can be analyzed, though they are diffuse and loosely organized. The Manosphere comprises several distinct online communities. 

Some titles are descriptive. Others are meant as insults. Broadly, they are groups of boys and young men. Each comes with a distinct online trace. Each online trace and community associates loosely with concepts. 

They are Men’s Rights Activists (MRAs)[1], Pick-Up Artists (PUAs)[2], Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)[3], Involuntary Celibates (Incels)[4], Fathers’ Rights Groups (FRGs)[5], Black Pill Groups (Black-Pill)[6], Looksmaxxers (L-Maxx)[7], Self-Improvement & Entrepreneurship Forums (S-I/E)[8], Alt-Right/White-Supremacist Overlaps (Alt-Right)[9], Gamergate & Online Harassment Collectives (Gamergate)[10], and Podcast Bros (PBs)[11].

Is it entirely misogynistic? Not in its entirety, yet misogyny is a central derivative theme. One of the ubiquitous traits is antifeminism. The antifeminism throughout the movements led to misogynistic content and ideology. 

It is crucial to situate these online milieus within the broader ecosystem. Recommendation algorithms on platforms like YouTube, Reddit, and TikTok, and the closed forums of Discord or private message boards, can amplify fringe content. Emerging evidence suggests algorithmic amplification. Research is less mature than for YouTube and Reddit.

These accelerate pathways to radicalization, sometimes linking misogynistic rhetoric to real-world violence. These movements frequently intersect with racial, class, and sexual biases. Comparative studies from Brazil to Eastern Europe, Hungary, Poland, and so on, reveal local variations of “anti-gender” campaigns. What are we to do with this nuance?

Selective Science and Cherry-Picked Claims

That nuance matters: antifeminism is one descriptive through-line. Is it grounded in science? Some of it, but selectively. Is it not grounded in science? Much of the other parts of it, for sure, particularly a lack of peer-reviewed science. 

At the same time, they cherry-pick evidence to support various claims. Therefore, a scientific orientation is present, albeit inchoate. We can work with this inchoate orientation. That’s a port of entry. These cherries come from mainstream fields of study but are often interpreted in ways that go beyond the evidence or are not supported by the larger body of research.

Community Void and Mental-Health Risks

A single study is not an evidence-based enquiry. Is it an answer for some boys and young men? That may be the key point. Our societies have removed many of the physical spaces where previous generations of boys and men gathered and found community.

Thus, the Manosphere, as it exists, offers a community and a framework. It has consequences, too. It is linked to anxiety, depression, and hostile attitudes, even suicidal ideation. In the humane analysis, some boys and young men are struggling. 

Few, arguably no, mainstream political ideologies—progressivism, traditional conservatism, feminism—or religious faith systems—Catholicism, Islam, Protestantism—are perceived by many boys and young men as providing an adequate response. That is, a response boys and young men find compelling.

Is it something, in a sense, more morally correct–however strange a concept coming from these loose groups–to meet boys and young men where they are rather than coercing or imposing a system on them? Unfortunately, we can see this in the numerous failures of ideologies to meet this challenge, often due to attempts at coercion or the imposition of a false naturalism. Is it, more appropriately, an answer when no answer has been given to contexts larger than them? 

Yes, they have little to no provision in the form of an intellectual grounding to frame sociopolitical conditional effects on them. A bad explanation is preferred over no explanation. So, is much of the Manosphere a bad answer? Yes.

However, there has been a failure to provide a socioeconomic response to geopolitical international events that impact more minor national concerns. Job loss, economic disruption, the divorce revolution, and other factors feed into this, and the fragmentary, largely incoherent organizational structure reflects these realities.

Structure and Sociopolitical Context

A digitally bustling collection of ideologies and online commentary communities came together under a loose banner. Some hate women. Either coming into those communities with it, or developing this once in it. Others, in it, strongly disagree with that framing of them and say so. 

Therefore, most do not seem to hate women, while many take in select, disunified negative stereotypes–see below. Some perceive a loss of status as if society were a limited pie and organized in a strict vertical hierarchy.

Others perceive no loss of status, as there are benefits in a broader set of life narratives beyond work. That is the larger point. Some commit violence against women and girls because they are women and girls. Most do not do so. Links to violence are correlational and occur in a minority of cases, not deterministically.

A mix of those groups does resent gender norm shifts. That is different from misogyny, even antifeminism. An umbrella hermeneutic for comprehension can be seen as an ideology of resentment in contemporary Western Enlightenment society. 

The “Mano-sphere” functions less as a ‘sphere’ and more clearly laterally in organizational semi-chaos while vertically in a distinct set of theories about human nature and gender relations. 

Biological Dominance and the Alpha-Beta Myth

These ideologically semi-coherent claims reflect the organizational structure at a different level. These groups make claims. Others within them do not, but the general principle for understanding the loose dynamics of these communities can provide insight into the fluid-structure and the arguments emerging from them. Let us take a look at some of these outcroppings: 

The core idea is that men are “naturally dominant” or reifying an assumption of a biological mandate for men’s supremacy as biologically determined. However, anthropological evidence suggests that flexible gender roles are prevalent across cultures and throughout time. This comes from MRAs and the Red Pill. 

Also, the alpha-beta analysis of hierarchies. The status of Alpha and Beta works in the context of wolves but not in another species with which we are more well-acquainted: human beings. Wild wolf packs have family units led by breeding pairs. 

David Mech, a key former proponent, disavowed the wolf example. In contrast, human societies are built more on context rather than hormone binaries. This comes from the Red Pill and the PUAs.

Intelligence, Brain Size, and Encephalization

Any notion of a difference in intelligence between men and women comes forward, too. In the face of variance, we do find differences, with men having more variation; however, on average, men and women have the same level of intelligence, as narrowly measured by intelligence quotient tests. 

The similar notion of brain size differences takes a literal approach to the observation without accounting for body size differences. The more realistic estimate is the encephalization quotient, which is the proportion of body size to brain volume. Negligible differences come up. There is little substance there. It is more generally found as a sexist trope in general culture replicated in some of these loose communities. 

Libido, Coyness, and Hypergamy

A trickier one in its simplicity while in a general sexually taboo-ridden culture. They claim women are more coy–coquettish–or have a lower libido than men. It is more of a traditionalist narrative here and in some involuntary celibate communities. Important to note that the involuntary celibate culture, in its benign origin story, was originated by a queer woman. 

Later, she left. The community contracted the term from “involuntary celibate” to “incel.” Still later, this splintered again and became the basis for some misogynist, violent male perpetrators. Evolutionary biology depicts a different narrative. Female sexuality is diverse and flexible, even as assertive as males at times. The ‘coy woman’ is an extension of Victorian Era pseudosexology.

Another idea is hypergamy or a dual mating strategy. This is used to ‘prove’ female promiscuity. The reality is that the hypothesis is speculative and context-dependent. To treat these as settled science is not only misleading, it is false. 

There is male extra-pair mating and human mating strategies are primarily individual to culture, more particularly to individuals. Women do not universally trade up. Same with men. The broader hypergamy point is that both sexes do this to some degree. The incel or Red Pill communities talk in these terms. 

Venus and Mars

Psychology and mental health speculations are intriguing, too. There is the use of the idea of women as “too emotional” or mentally unstable. Men are seen as logical. Meta-analyses find no cognitive performance drop with hormone cycles or based on sex. The MGTOW and anti-feminist groups speak in these terms. 

Another more generic and somewhat mainstream is the idea of being transgender as a mental illness. However, the DSM-5, WHO ICD-11, APA, and Endocrine Society, and more agree that gender identity is non-pathological. Gender dysphoria is different. It is treatable distress, not identity disorder. Some Manosphere and right-wingers utilize this line of thought. 

Destigmatizing Mental Illness

Another peculiarity in this space is the claim that depression is either mislabelled laziness or simply not real. Depression is recognized in DSM-5 and ICD-11, and with neurochemical and genetic bases. A mental illness is as real as cancer, diabetes, or other issues of the body in dysfunction and requires medical treatment. Andrew Tate and others make this style of assertion. 

Population selection dynamics are yet another avenue of these commentaries. They claim that about 1 in 5 men get about 4 times as many as women. The rest of the population goes celibate. The fact of the matter is that about 9 in 10 men and women have less than or equal to one partner per year. Therefore, the notion of a small elite cohort of men is factually incorrect and lacks empirical support. Incel and Red Pill tend to propagate this.

‘The Wall’ and ‘Carousel Riders’

One directed purely at women on a visual aesthetic is the notion of ‘the wall” or, rather, “hitting the wall.” The assertion is that attractiveness and fertility plummet at age 30 for women on average. The premise is a cliff and at a universal age. Female fertility truly declines from about age 32 and then more so after 37. Aging and fertility decline are a gradual slope and vary by person and happen not just for women but for men, too. 

Another premise based on an epithet is “carousel riders.” The idea is that sleeping around a lot destroys the ability for pair bonding. Moderate premarital partner counts, 3–9, correlate with lower divorce rates than very low counts. No empirical evidence supports the notion of using up bonding capacity in this manner. This is typically used within the traditional conservative communities and in Red Pill writings. 

Lifestyle and Health Myths

Any movement or community sufficiently organized tends to come with lifestyle advice beyond the political, economic, religious, or societal advisements. One finds dietary recommendations, too. Soy products–it is argued–feminize men with an increase in estrogen and a decrease in testosterone. 

One can see these reflected in so-called “soy boy” memes on social media. However, one must do the science to see if assertions are correct or hunches, guesses, or intuitions. Meta-analyses find no effect of phytoestrogens from soy products on male hormones. This is essentially a result of the prevailing culture at this point.

NoFap and ‘Semen Retention’

Another popular recommendation is ‘NoFap’ (semen retention). The assertion is that it boosts testosterone, energy, focus, and muscle. Unfortunately, for those expounding on the benefits of this method, there is no lasting testosterone increase past a brief spike at about 7 days. Many minor benefits are difficult to attribute solely to the likely placebo effect and other lifestyle change factors. NoFap and some parts of the MGTOW groups spread this.

Pornography and Negligible Diagnoses

One modern phenomenon is not the use of nudity and imagery for arousal and sexual self-stimulation but the manifestation of this in porn to extend this into the online world. Many, many people use porn and its array of genres. 

The claim about pornography is that the brain is ‘rewired,’ and the use of porn causes addiction and/or impotence as if some types of drugs when over-used. Any claim of “porn addiction” lacks sufficient evidence. It is not a diagnosis. Moderate use has no evidence of harm. 

Compulsive use of pornography may be classified, but under a different disorder, CSBD or an impulse-control disorder. Therefore, it is not causally linked with substance addiction or an official diagnosis in and of itself, even then only in rarer cases for the orthogonal instances. NoFap and some conservatives tend to spread this thinking. 

Emasculation Conspiracy Theories

However, another claim is that ‘modern chemicals’—plastics, vaccines, and the like—are part of a plot to emasculate men, somehow. There are things like endocrine disruptors. However, the declines in testosterone are very gradual and connected to obesity and inactivity rather than a conspiracy of the State or Feminism to undermine men. MGTOW and Red Pill tend to be the ones propounding these ideological views. 

When Bad Answers Fill Real Vacuums

As can be seen, there is some evidence, albeit incomplete, for certain views within the Manosphere. At the same time, a large amount of disjunct or loose, thematically connected hypotheses are proposed without any evidence or minimal, partial evidence. Nothing explicitly wrong with this. 

However, they are hypothesized as if they’re theories or substantiated by connected, high-quality evidence to support the strength of the claims. To form various sub-communities based on weak evidence, people will be influenced by worldviews lacking robust empiricism. In these cases, the bad answers generally influence a sector of boys and young men. 

Those men will make poorer decisions because of inaccurate information about the world around them. This becomes a concern for boys and young men who enter these spaces, as well as for the older men, women, and girls in their lives. 

This is all the critical difference between absorbing misogynistic stereotypes without explicit hatred and embracing direct hatred of women as women. Other emotional literacy and community support are emerging in contrast. They show promise in mitigating loneliness and distress. A key entry point into some of the less healthy online spaces.

We need culturally attuned policy responses, digital literacy curricula, and transparent content-moderation frameworks. Longitudinal research highlights men who disengage from these communities find resilience through mentoring, sports, faith groups, and other protective factors.

These communities cannot easily be categorized or analyzed because of the amorphous nature of the online spaces. Also, the occasional lone wolf misogynist violence perpetrator inspired by some of it, who becomes the basis for justified temporary media sensationalism and unjustified extension of incel into an epithet for men and boys. 

At their core, these spaces reflect genuine struggles—boys and young men seeking belonging and explanations–while producing some truisms couched in selective, limited empirical research. Similar happens when they find more constructive digital communes in Movember or The ManKind Project. By guiding them toward evidence-based frameworks, emotional literacy, and real-world community, we help turn ‘wanderers’ into pioneers of healthier masculinities.

–

[1] MRAs: patriarchy, misandry, false rape accusation, divorce rape, feminazi.

[2] PUAs: negging, kino, DHV (Demonstration of Higher Value), frame control, abundance.

[3] MGTOW: gynocentric, AWALT (“All Women Are Like That”), beta uprising, herbivore men, safe horny.

[4] Incels: blackpill, femoid, Chad/Stacy, looksmaxxing, oneitis, orbiter.

[5] FRGs: custody bias, alimony injustice, false accusations, family court bias.

[6] Black-Pill: nihilism, romantic fatalism, rope talk, looksmaxx emphasis.

[7] L-Maxx: looksmaxxing, mewing, mogging, SMV (Sexual Market Value), Y-pilled.

[8] S-I/E: alpha lifestyle, abundance mindset, status-building, fitness-business blending.

[9] Alt-Right: racial hierarchy, Great Replacement, anti-immigration, misogynist conspiracy.

[10] Gamergate: harassment, doxxing, “ethics” façade, anti-feminist trolling.

[11] PBs: long-form male affirmation, alt-right adjacent political commentary, toxic lifestyle advice.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen is Secretary of, and Chair of the Media Committee for, The New Enlightenment Project. He is the publisher of In-Sight Publishing (ISBN: 978-1-0692343) and Editor-in-Chief of In-Sight: Interviews (ISSN: 2369-6885). He writes for The Good Men Project, International Policy Digest (ISSN: 2332–9416), The Humanist (Print: ISSN 0018-7399; Online: ISSN 2163-3576), Basic Income Earth Network (UK Registered Charity 1177066), A Further Inquiry, and other media. He is a member in good standing of numerous media organizations.

Photo by 550Park Luxury Wedding Films on Unsplash