What are we talking about when we talk about a crisis in masculinity?

Masculinity is in crisis. This is a readily agreed upon view amongst many scholars, pop psychologists and media figures alike.

Examining declining educational achievement, high suicide rates, and a growing cohort of ‘angry men’ determined to reclaim a lost sense of masculinity, it is clear, according to some, that something is going wrong with men across the world. Pankaj Mishra (2018) argues, for example, that thinkers and leaders around the world –from Jordan Peterson to Donald Trump – are desperately try to reclaim a traditional notion masculinity in the wake of an ‘emasculation’ that has occurred through social changes in recent decades. He argues:

It is as though the fantasy of male strength measures itself most gratifyingly against the fantasy of female weakness. Equating women with impotence and seized by panic about becoming cucks, these rancorously angry men are symptoms of an endemic and seemingly unresolvable crisis of masculinity (Mishra 2018).

But what do we actually mean when we’re talking about a crisis in masculinity? While the notion of a masculinity in crisis is increasingly assumed in both academic and public debate, its growth in popularity has resulted in the concept being difficult to define, and in turn it being used by people for a range of different ends.

By interrogating the two dominant approaches to a ‘masculinity in crisis’ I argue that we can see a range of the problems associated with the idea. Firstly, the notion of masculinity in crisis totalises the role that masculine norms play in men’s lives so much that nothing else ends up mattering. Men become defined by masculinity, and nothing else. Whether from sociology, academics or thinkers like Jordan Peterson, an incessant focus on masculinity ignores much of the complexity of men’s lives, and reduces all solutions to the problems men face to changing gendered norms. I argue for a broader approach to understanding men’s lives, one which sees many of the issues facing modern men as sitting within a broader context of social breakdown and decay in a neoliberal era.

‘The Manosphere’

My question about the actual features of the crisis of masculinity arises in the context of the growth of an online sphere described as the ‘manosphere’ (Marwick and Caplan 2018). The manosphere is extremely useful in examining the notion of a masculinity in crisis as it provides a clear representation of the different ways the concept is invoked in public debate. On one side, participants in the manosphere frequently discuss feeling as though they exist within this crisis of masculinity, and in doing so turn to the manosphere as a way to deal with this. Manosphere participants frequently valorise traditional masculinity, arguing that a return to historical norms and privileges is the solution to the problems they are facing. On the other side of the ledger, the manosphere is increasingly being studied as a toxic symptom of the crisis in masculinity, and in particular as case study of the “backlash” (Faludi 1991; Hodapp, 2019) against challenges to masculine norms. The solution for opponents and critics of the manosphere is to further break down masculine ideas so that the return to a historical version of masculinity is not possible. The manosphere therefore captures the different what different constituencies think about a masculinity in crisis, in turn highlighting the contradictions in the uses to which the term is put.

So, what is the manosphere? According to the popular website Know Your Meme (2015) the manosphere is: a neologism used to describe a loose network of blogs, forums and online communities on the English-speaking web that are devoted to a wide range of mens’ interests, from life philosophies and gender relations to self-improvement tips and strategies for success in life, relationships and sex.

While this definition focuses on the English-speaking web the manosphere has increasingly spread to non-English parts of the world as well. The manosphere operates across a range of online forums and spaces. This includes social media and sites such as 4Chan, 8Chan, Reddit and Youtube, websites, and community and news forums such as incel.me (and incel forum) and trp.red (a forum for participants who align to the philosophy of The Red Pill).

The manosphere fits within a broader a men’s rights movement, which is re-emerging in online spaces (Hodapp 2019). The men’s rights movement is a reaction against feminism, part of a broader backlash against feminist movements and ideas. As Lyons (2017, p. 8) explains, the manosphere: includes various overlapping circles, such as Men’s Rights Activists (MRAs), who argue that the legal system and media unfairly discriminate against men; Pickup Artists (PUAs), who help men learn how to manipulate women into having sex with them; Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOWs), who protest women’s supposed dominance by avoiding relationships with them; and others.

Manosphere participants frequently engage in discussions around masculinity and in particular articulate the idea that masculinity is under attack. As Ging (2017) describes, much of the discourse within the manosphere is based in evolutionary psychology and genetic determinism, one that relies heavily on essentialised biological understandings of men and women. These notions valorise a notion of what Ging and others (e.g. Massanari 2017; Salter 2018) describe as geek culture, with men seen as rational and logical, while women are irrational, emotional, and most of all hardwired to pair with what they describe as ‘alpha males’ (Ging 2017). Men, and in particular many of the inherent traits, of masculinity are seen as under attack from feminism, resulting in a range of negative impacts.

Members of the manosphere have been engaged in campaigns of abuse and misogyny both on and offline. This has included #gamergate, a systematic campaign of abuse targeted at female games developers (Massanari 2017; Salter 2018), and #TheFappening, which consisted of the illegal release and sharing of thousands of nude photos of female celebrities (Massanari 2017; Moloney and Love 2018). At an even more extreme level, antifeminist and misogynist sentiment has been connected to a number of mass shootings, massacres and terrorist events (Dragiewicz and Mann 2016; Kalish and Kimmel 2010). This includes high profile shootings and terrorist attacks by incels. Incels believe that due to a mixture of their own genetic problems, as well as women’s inherent desire to mate with attractive men they call ‘chads’ that they are unable to find women who want to have sex or form relationships with them. Incel forums often include angry rants against women for their unwillingness to enter into relationships with them. In 2014 the self-described incel Elliot Rodgers killed 6 people in a shooting in Isla Vista in the United States, and in 2018 Alek Minassian killed 11 in a van attack in Toronto. Both cited anger at their status as incels as motivations behind their attacks.