In this Modern Wisdom episode, James Bloodworth examines the "manosphere" - a term originally describing male-focused online communities that has since broadened in meaning. Bloodworth and host Chris Williamson explore how social media influencers spread manosphere ideologies, and how these communities attract men who feel uncertain about their masculine identity.
The discussion delves into the societal factors contributing to the manosphere's growth, including changes in gender roles and economic conditions. Bloodworth and Williamson analyze how the shift from industrial to service work has affected men's sense of status, and how progressive rhetoric's focus on symbolic representation rather than underlying social issues may drive some men toward manosphere ideologies.
Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
James Bloodworth explains that while "manosphere" originally referred to specific male-focused online communities, including male supremacist and anti-feminist groups, the term has become increasingly diluted. Similar to how "woke" has been weaponized in political discourse, "manosphere" is now often misused to discredit anyone engaging in traditionally masculine activities. This broad application, Bloodworth argues, diminishes the term's usefulness in understanding these communities.
The manosphere landscape has evolved to focus more on individual influencers, with figures like Andrew Tate gaining prominence through provocative, often misogynistic content. Bloodworth notes that these influencers typically gain followers by making outrageous statements and promoting cynical views about relationships. The rise of social media and short-form video content has allowed these ideologies to spread beyond their original communities, with fitness influencers often serving as gateway content creators who gradually introduce manosphere-aligned views.
The manosphere provides a space for men feeling disempowered or uncertain about their masculine identity. Bloodworth observes that it attracts followers by attaching status to power over women and promoting alpha/beta male dynamics. Chris Williamson adds that men often see female attention as validation of their "alpha" status. However, Bloodworth points out that these ideologies can damage relationships by discouraging emotional expression and promoting manipulative behavior.
Williamson and Bloodworth discuss how shifts in gender roles and economic conditions have contributed to the manosphere's growth. They note that changes in the job market, particularly the shift from industrial to service work, have left some men feeling a loss of status. Bloodworth criticizes progressive rhetoric for focusing on symbolic representation while neglecting underlying social problems, suggesting this disconnect might drive working-class men toward manosphere ideologies. The discussion reveals how online echo chambers amplify these views, particularly among men who feel marginalized by societal changes.
1-Page Summary
The term "manosphere" has undergone significant changes in meaning and scope since its inception, with critics now arguing that its overuse has diluted both its meaning and its usefulness.
James Bloodworth cites that "manosphere" originally referred to distinct online communities primarily comprised of male supremacist, anti-feminist, and pickup artist groups.
Bloodworth observes that the term "manosphere" has expanded so broadly that it risks becoming almost meaningless. Instead of denoting specific groups, it has been appropriated by media to label anyone with characteristics stereotypically associated with men, such as the ability to perform a bench press or listening to Joe Rogan.
He dialogs that the word is not inherently negative and could be benign to those unfamiliar with its subcultures. However, Bloodworth equates the misuse of "manosphere" to the misuse of "woke" in political parlance, where it has been used to discredit any disliked concept on the right, conflating individuals with the most egregious elements they might share.
The overuse and careless application of terms like "Manosphere" and "toxic masculinity" are lamented by Bloodworth, who believes they have been thrown around too freely. This tends to obscure more nuanced discussions and diminishes the terms' effectiveness in understanding the associated communities.
Bloodworth illuminates the strategy of some progressives or people purpo ...
The Definition and Evolution of the Term "Manosphere"
The manosphere has seen an evolution with more focus on individual influencers like Andrew Tate than the broader ecosystem. Tate, a prominent figure in the manosphere, promotes cynical and misogynistic views, suggesting men present an ostentatious lifestyle or be left behind romantically. James Bloodworth discusses concepts of social proof and status often emphasized in the manosphere.
Bloodworth points out that influencers gain clout for saying outrageous things, which can attract followers. He notes that Tate's content influences young men's attitudes and mentions that Gen Z men believe in the 80/20 rule of attraction, indicative of Manosphere ideology. This ideology can even permeate school environments with boys repeating Tate's misogynistic phrases.
With the advent of smartphones and short videos, there's a generalized resentment and a sense that one is missing out, which Bloodworth links to the manosphere. Fitness influencers start by discussing their expertise area but then inject manosphere-aligned views on other topics.
Bloodworth and Williamson talk about the impact of social media and influencers on spreading these ideologies to vulnerable audiences, focusing on sensational figures and neglecting a deeper context or comprehensive analysis. These narratives c ...
The Rise of Specific Manosphere Subcultures and Influencers
The manosphere is influencing the understanding and performance of masculinity, drawing men searching for their role in society, even as it disrupts their ability for empathy, emotional expression, and healthy relationships.
The manosphere provides a space for men who feel disempowered or ashamed of their masculinity. Bloodworth observes that the manosphere’s allure is rooted in how it attaches status to power over women, viewing them as status objects. This subculture promotes the notion that men can find dominance within their homes, akin to being mini-oligarchs or feudal lords in a family setting. It also pushes the belief that men must not stagnate within a relationship, maintaining their appearance and success as part of their masculine identity.
Central to the manosphere's ideology is the alpha/beta male dichotomy, with the alpha male often exalted as a figure of true masculinity. Chris Williamson highlights how men often feel positively reinforced when selected by a woman, seeing it as an affirmation of alpha status and success. Men who feel their attempts at relationships or attraction are failing are often told it's because they are not being "alpha" enough. Leaders like Vladimir Putin become idolized Alpha figures, emphasizing dominance as a key masculine trait.
Bloodworth raises concerns about how the manosphere’s standpoints discourage the expression of emotion, with the exception of anger. This has real-life implications for relationships; men who embrace these ideologies may refuse to show emotion or engage equitably in household duties. Women have reported to forums such as X Red Pill that their significant other's ad ...
The Relationship Between the Manosphere and Masculinity/Male Identity
Chris Williamson and James Bloodworth delve into the societal and cultural shifts that have contributed to the growth and appeal of the manosphere, an online network where men's rights and anti-feminist ideologies often proliferate.
The discussion acknowledges that as gender roles and the economy shift, some men experience a sense of lost status, leading to resentment and a draw toward traditional masculinity.
Bloodworth speaks to a recalibration of identity for men who don't feel they have a status in society and mentions the change in the economy from industrial, physically demanding jobs, which were seen as dignified and masculine, to service-oriented jobs considered less physical and often thought of as more feminine. Williamson introduces evidence suggesting that there's a dynamic tension in the earnings relationship between men and women that may not align with traditional roles or expectations.
Williamson and Bloodworth debate how more working-class men lean right politically, possibly feeling abandoned by traditionally working-class-representing left-leaning parties. They also discuss the impact of societal expectations and economic needs on male earning desires. Men who lack societal status or economic prosperity may seek to assert dominance at home to compensate for their perceived loss in the public sphere.
Bloodworth criticizes aspects of progressive rhetoric for focusing on symbolic representation rather than addressing underlying social problems, such as workers' conditions. He notes that companies promote equality but fail to guard basic worker rights, and observes that there's a disconnect between progressive politicians and the people they represent, particularly working-class men.
Echo chambers may amplify the manosphere ideologies, potentially leading to harmful outcomes, such as the rationalization of domestic violence. Bloodworth mentions that Andrew Tate's content online could have a hidden detrimental effect.
He also indicates that figures l ...
Societal and Cultural Factors Contributing To Manosphere Growth
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser