What Is The Manosphere?

Now People Are Interested in Men.

Ever since Trump won the election everyone seems to have their panties in a bunch.

“We lost male voters.”

“Men don’t care about womens rights”.

“4b movement”

Oh noooowwww you motherfuckers acknowledge you need us soemthing?

Now we’re the topic of discussion eh?

Now you realize, oh shit, we might need these men more than we thought. That’s right, dummies. When you shit on men, tell the world you don’t need them and they’re worthless pieces of shit, things might not go your way come election.

Now the attention has turned to…

THE MANOSPHERE!

Bahahahahahahahahahaha.

I love how completely insufferable these people are and how easy they are to predict. It gives me great ammo to cock load and with. Because no matter what happens in this world, the problem is always

• Patrairchy

• Men get paid more

• Men don’t care

• Men are aggressors/rapists/violent

• Men are responsible

• Choose the bear

And now?

THE MANOSPHERE.

The latest scapegoat for people to hinge onto instead of admitting that, “Hey maybe we ignored and demonized men so much that it’s partially our fault”.

One thing I hate about a lot of people is the lack of critical thinking, the lack of nuance, and the whole paradigm of “Bad Vs Good” when in reality, life is mostly shades of grey, there are no innocents unless you’re a child under the age of 7 years old. Look, the world isn’t a coin flip between heroes and villains; it’s a chessboard where every piece has a story.

I can’t stand performative virtue signaling ass hats vomiting their think pieces all over legacy media who clutch their pearls and rarely do any research. Talking shit about things they’ve never lived and being so out of touch they wouldn’t know what the manosphere is if it pissed in their smug little faces.

Fuck those guys.

“Wait, Mav are you defending, the manosphere?”

Just shut up and read the whole article. Or block me, bitch. Either way, just remember, unless we engage regularly, I don’t even know you exist.

One thing I hate more than ever is people distorting complex social issues by oversimplifying the motivations and beliefs of various online male communities, reducing them to a monolithic force of misogyny and extremism, and if you dare to have a thought with nuance…

“Well, I guess that means you support them”.

Oh, do grow up. Please.

Some people would rather build straw men than wrestle with real arguments. It’s easier to burn down something they never tried to understand, eh?

I studied the manosphere for about 2 years.

Right when Fresh and Fit did their whole “humilating women online” thing. I was shocked, we all were.

Watched videos, read books, read articles, and listened to podcasts. I was fascinated, being completely honest.

The manosphere is not a singular, radicalized entity but a spectrum of ideas, some deeply disturbed. Some are kinda harmless, and some are good pieces of advice.

Others are reflective of legitimate concerns about modern masculinity, mental health, and societal expectations. Ya see, this is the part they conveniently cherry-pick not to tell you, cause it would ruin their shock factor and clickbait tendencies.

These digital leeches will exploit the wound to stir their outrage, but silence the pain that might heal it. Cause it doesn’t serve their broader narrative. They need your suffering to sell, but not your growth to solve.

Pain is only marketable when it’s packaged with blame. And it’s so easy to do when the blame is placed on men.

Gender discourse has never been a black-and-white narrative. When people write like this, they merely perpetuate division rather than fostering any real kind of understanding. If you paint every man questioning modern gender dynamics as a villain (red pill/Manosphere/PUA), you’re disincentivizing healthy discourse and creating resentment.

If that’s you…

Eat my ass.

Understanding is built through discussion, not demonization. That’s my plan in this article.

So, WTF is the manosphere?

A collection of online communities ranging from Red Pill adherents, Pick-Up Artists (PUAs), Involuntary Celibates (Incels), and Men’s Rights Activists (MRAs), this space has become a lightning rod for discussions on gender, relationships, and the shifting dynamics of masculinity in modern society, as women are consistently promoted as evolving. Men are seen as staying the same. A vicious wheel of propaganda that doesn’t seem to stop.

To some, the manosphere offers hard truths and practical advice for men navigating an evolving world where traditional gender roles are no longer as clear-cut, and people have their final verdict on what all men are and will ever be.

To others, it is a hot and heavy breeding ground for misogyny, victimhood narratives, and even radicalization.

But when I was researching this, I found that this directly parallels radical feminism.

Imagine that…

Radical feminism and extreme male spaces are just two sides of the same self-destructive coin, each feeding off the other’s worst impulses.

Both build their identities on victimhood, framing either men or women as powerless casualties of a rigged system they’ll never defeat.

They thrive on demonization, where men are seen as oppressive predators or women as manipulative deceivers, rejecting any room for nuance. Their echo chambers reinforce their beliefs, shutting out opposing viewpoints and escalating grievances into ideological warfare.

This is all over social media. Trust me.

Both rewrite reality to fit their narrative. Radical feminists dismiss biological influences to push gender as a pure social construct, while extreme male spaces claim hypergamy is an unshakable law of female nature, ignoring individual variation. And at their core, both disguise revenge as empowerment. Radical feminism pushes misandry under the guise of progress, while radicalized men promote emotional detachment and manipulation as a means to “win” against women.

But do any of the beliefs within these redpill groups hold weight? Are their claims about feminism, gender roles, and relationships supported by science, psychology, and real-world data?

It’s easy to dismiss them as radical misogynist douchebags, so let’s put our money where our mouth is and look into what they claim with an unbiased deep dive into what these groups believe, analyze the validity of their arguments, and assess their impact on society.

The Red Pill: The “Reality” of Gender Dynamics?

The Red Pill movement derives its name from The Matrix, where taking the pill symbolizes waking up to a hidden truth. In the manosphere, “Red Pillers” claim that modern feminism has misled men and that women operate on primal instincts rather than rational choice.

What do they believe

• Hypergamy — Women are biologically wired to always seek the “best” man available, constantly looking to “trade up.”

• Alpha vs. Beta Males — Alphas (dominant, high-status men) are sexually desired, while Betas (kind, supportive men) are only valued for resources.

• Frame Control — A man must always maintain emotional dominance in a relationship.

• AWALT (All Women Are Like That) — Women, by nature, are said to be manipulative and driven by self-interest.

Is There Any Truth to It?

Let me know in the comments. After all, we are the sum of some of our experiences. Sometimes, our data is our own reality.

Men who actually date women. (Not hetero women who don’t date women). Sound off in the comments, what do you think?

🔹 Hypergamy — Studies indicate that women tend to be attracted to high-status men. Research also shows that long-term pair bonding relies on emotional connection, stability, and shared values, not just social rank (Buss, 1989; Eastwick et al., 2014). So in the short term, that could work, but in the long term, it might fall off the hinges. My own personal experience is that the more weight I lost, the more money I made, and the more women I dated. But again, to be clear, it’s MY personal experience, not facts or real data. Hypergamy is very real; the real question is how much of it they possess.

🔹 Alpha vs. Beta Males — The concept of “alpha” and “beta” males originates from misinterpreted studies on wolf behavior (Mech, 1999). In human relationships, traits like kindness, reliability, and humor are repeatedly ranked as more attractive than “dominance” in long-term partners (Li et al., 2002). I think, ultimately, women don’t want to date a smarmy, sycophantic pushover whose lips are so far up her ass he’s lost. Alpha and Beta discussions are up for debate, IMO. Besides, anyone who ever calls themselves an Alpha is usually a little pussy who wouldn’t know what breasts are even if they came in a bucket.

🔹 Frame Control & Manipulation — Social dominance can be appealing in initial attraction, but long-term relationships thrive on mutual respect, emotional intelligence, and shared decision-making (Gottman, 1994). So again, it seems to get you in the room, but it doesn’t necessarily help you live together in the house. You must have more.

So, What Do I Think?

Biological factors influence some elements of attraction, I think anyone who ignores that is just kinda dumb tbh, the idea that all women are hypergamous or that dominance alone secures attraction is oversimplified and a little misleading. But it’s definitely not something that should be ignored either. As a man, you must study and experience the nuances for yourself. Experience is the mother of all learning, after all.

Pick-Up Artists (PUAs) — Science or Psychological Manipulation?

PUAs emerged in the early 2000s — does anyone remember that show on VH1? Teaching men strategies to increase attraction through psychology, confidence-building, and persuasion techniques. They still exist!

What do they believe?

• Social Proof — Women desire men who are desired by other women.

• Negging — Using subtle insults to lower a woman’s self-esteem and make her seek validation.

• Peacocking — Dressing flamboyantly to stand out.

• Kino Escalation — Gradually increasing physical touch to build attraction.

Psychological Backing?

🔹 Social Proof — The idea that people desire what others desire is supported by Cialdini’s principles of persuasion (Cialdini, 1984). So again, it works for initial attraction and getting someone’s attention. But real-world relationships are built on way more than external validation. This actually works. Social proof is a real thing. I see nothing wrong with it. So long as you know, it’s merely an entryway, not a crutch. Hanging out with girls who were my friends and meeting other women was definitely a little easier.

🔹 Negging — Studies on interpersonal attraction show that kindness and emotional support build long-term attraction, while intentional insults decrease relational satisfaction (Swami et al., 2009). I think negging is garbage, but my partner and I lightly roast each other all the time, and it’s hilarious. I guess being playful with women means you have a great deal of levity. But insulting someone to build attraction is an old, played-out trick, and women can see exactly what you’re trying to do. This one is a cheap parlor trick I never advise anyone to do.

🔹 Kino Escalation — Touch does play a role in attraction (Gallace & Spence, 2010), but it has to be a natural consensual progression. If you’re using it as a coercive tactic, it not only undermines genuine consent and comfort, but holy shit, you might go to jail.

CONSENT. CONSENT. CONSENT!

Verdict?

PUAs offer some valid points — don’t knock 'em just yet. They have some positive opinions on confidence and social skills.

But I feel like their cheap reliance on dirty little manipulation and coercion tactics backfires. I think it might work on some dumb chick with low self-esteem. But ultimately, PUA tricks lead to inauthentic connections and a destructive male perception of women.

One of the biggest names in the PUA community, Neil Strauss, the author of The Game, later completely abandoned them, recognizing the toxic cycle they created. In his follow-up book, The Truth, he admitted that PUA tricks like negging, peacocking, and scripted routines ultimately fostered insecurity, deception, and hollow connections rather than genuine intimacy. He now advocates for emotional maturity and real connection. If you build attraction through deceit, you’ll always fear the truth.

“The biggest lesson I learned is that the game is not about women. And it’s not about picking up women. It’s about the men. It’s about a guy who feels like he’s not good enough.” — Neil Strauss.

Well, shit.

Incels — A Darker Path Rooted in Brutal Despair

Incels (involuntary celibates) believe that their inability to attract women is due to unchangeable genetic or societal disadvantages. I wrote about them a few weeks back. Unlike Red Pillers or PUAs, they see dating as a rigged game that dooms certain men to lifelong rejection.

Core Beliefs

• Black Pill Ideology — Self-improvement is useless, looks and height determine everything.

• Women Are Cruel Selectors — Women only date “Chads” (handsome, dominant men).

• Sex as a Right — Incels view sex as something they are “owed” rather than a consensual exchange.

The Reality

🔹 Physical Attraction — Studies confirm that physical appearance plays a huge role in attraction, but personality, confidence, and emotional intelligence matter just as much, if not more, in long-term relationships (Eastwick & Finkel, 2008). So technically, they’re not entirely wrong. The only component that they’re missing is that you must have BOTH. Looks and emotional intelligence. Unfortunately, looks do matter. Anyone who says otherwise is an idiot. You have to work with what god gave you.

🔹 The Victim Mentality Trap — Learned helplessness (Seligman, 1972) explains how negative reinforcement reinforces the belief that one is powerless, leading to depression and resentment rather than proactive change. When they all band together and talk shit online, it’s a nuclear explosion of one of the worst echo chambers imaginable. All gas and no breaks. These men are dangerous.

🔹 Entitlement & Radicalization — Research shows that perceived social rejection can lead to extremist thinking and hostility toward women, hence some of the Incel terrorist attacks we’ve had. (Baumeister & Bushman, 2010).

Final Verdict

Incels accurately identify that dating can be difficult; this is why they have such a massive following, but their belief in fixed fate and victimhood will always prevent any real self-improvement. Instead of accepting defeat, psychology suggests changing mindsets, working on self-worth, and taking action, something I’m sure they’ll get upset if you tell them to.

They’re right, Chad’s bag most of the women. But that isn’t the end of anyone’s story.

They’re dangerous, I’m not kidding. I know it’s fun for women to clown and antagonize men online for all sorts of reasons. But the wrong one might take it too seriously and do something insane. Hell, some of them already have.

Men’s Rights Activists (MRAs) — Advocating for Men or Attacking Feminism?

MRAs argue that men face systemic disadvantages, especially in family courts, false accusations, and mental health neglect.

Some MRAs genuinely focus on these issues, while others use them as a weapon against women’s rights. I keep telling you there’s good and bad with all of these groups; things are never black and white.

Legitimate Concerns I found

• Male Suicide Rates — Men are disproportionately affected by suicide (WHO, 2019).

• Bias in Family Courts — Studies suggest bias in custody decisions favoring mothers (Cancian et al., 2014). This has been proven countless times. Google is your friend here.

• Lack of Support for Male Abuse Victims — Male domestic violence victims are often underreported (Douglas & Hines, 2011).

These are very real issues they discuss and shouldn’t be ignored.

There are some Shitty Aspects…

• Blaming Feminism for Everything — Social issues affecting men exist independently of women’s rights. C’mon man. They need to think more broadly.

• Ignoring Intersectionality — Gender issues are multifaceted, they always have been. I always critique some idiots on here who just castrate men and describe us in such an atomized, monolithic, and oversimplified state cause it’s simply not true, both men and women face unique societal pressures. We can’t keep jumping to “Whataboutism” when either sex explains there’s.

My Final Verdict

MRAs highlight real issues; I’m not kidding. Men are going through some shit right now, and it’s an insult to say they don’t exist and they’re minuscule. They do have a few legs to stand on. However, here’s the hairy “butt.” Solutions require cooperation and reform, not opposition to women’s progress. Men’s rights should never be hurled around as a counter-argumentative weapon against women’s rights.

Can we work together? FFS!!!

So What The Fuck Does All This Mean?

The manosphere is a complex landscape, man.

It always has been. That’s why I hate pearl-clutching performative cock nozzles who like to write about it as if they’re saving the planet. The manosphere is kinda insidious cause it mixes very valid and legitimate observations with terribly and sneaky misguided generalizations and, in some cases, harmful ideology. This is where they’ll always lose me.

I can’t co-sign any of it.

The truth?

Many of the struggles men face are fucking real, but the solutions lie in genuine self-growth, emotional intelligence, and healthier narratives, not in blaming or resenting women. Sure, millions of women do shitty things. Daily. But it’s not cause they're women, it’s cause they’re humans, and tbh people in general suck. The older you get, the more apparent it becomes.

MEN MUST HAVE THEIR OWN EXPERIENCES. Get out of the house, man, and spend time with women. And don’t allow 10 hell, maybe even 30 bad experiences with women to ruin your perception of them. I’ve dated so many women. I don’t type this from a place of bragging. But I type this from a place of EXPERIENCE.

Date meet all kinds of women from different towns, careers, races, and everything else. They’re not ALL THE SAME.

I have genuine care and love for most good men, sincerely. But we really have to take careful consideration of the content we consume. The manosphere is a double-edged sword; it sharpens some men while poisoning others. But too often, it traps them in bitterness, making them spectators of their own lives instead of participants.

Don’t let a handful of bad experiences convince you that all women are the enemy. The world is bigger than your pain, and your next experience is not dictated by your last. Expand your horizons. Meet different women from different places, backgrounds, and walks of life. Be a man who knows, not a man who assumes.

A man who refuses to engage with the world will never master it. Cynicism is the refuge of the untested. Get out there. Test yourself. The truth isn’t spoken, it’s lived.

Psychological research consistently shows that confidence, self-improvement, and a growth mindset lead to better outcomes in dating, relationships, and life. The question is…

Are you willing to challenge your beliefs and evolve?