The Manosphere and Online Misogyny: Q&A

Question: How are women joining these spaces impacting them? We have seen a rise in women who feed into these ideas, and I am just wondering the impact this is having.

Question: To what extent has online misogyny contributed to the growing appeal of tradwife content on TikTok, and how should we understand the role that high-profile tradwife influencers such as Nara Smith play within the wider dynamics of the manosphere?

Anda: To answer these questions – there are a few ways through which women enter these spaces and sustain their own manosphere orbiting anti-feminist communities. One major pathway is through content created by “tradwives,” but we also see women manosphere influencers that follow the same ‘recipe’ as men in these communities, through inflammatory takes and online content aimed at causing rage and encouraging engagement – a example of this is Hannah Pearl Davis, better known online as JustPearlyThings.

I will focus on tradwifes to better explain this phenomenon. Tradwives are women who promote traditional gender roles centred on domesticity, homemaking, and a lifestyle that emphasises staying at home. Their content is often tied to traditional Christian values and political conservatism, and it has become increasingly popular on mainstream social media - particularly through its aesthetic links to cottagecore, quiet farm life, and imagery drawn from 1950s–60s nuclear family ideals. These influencers present a soft, hyper-feminine image: women who have endless time to dress beautifully, cook homemade meals, and live a fairy-tale domestic life.

It is important to recognise, however, that tradwife content promotes gender-normative feminine ideals and not feminism. Many tradwife influencers argue that traditional domestic roles are “better” for women, claiming that over the past 20–30 years women have been pressured to fulfil multiple roles simultaneously: career-driven breadwinner and primary homemaker. What this narrative fails to acknowledge is that the call to return to “simpler times” - when women were financially dependent on husbands or partners, excluded from public and political life, and discouraged from pursuing education, careers, or hobbies outside the home - directly pushes back against the progress achieved by feminist movements. Reduced access to education, public life, and political participation inevitably undermines women’s rights and liberties. We are already seeing these rights being eroded in real time, for example, through restrictive access to or outright ban of abortion in the United States.

For tradwife influencers, financial incentives also play a major role. Many have observed the popularity, attention, and revenue generated by male manosphere creators and have tapped into the same online ecosystem. This often results in a striking hypocrisy: while they discourage their followers from pursuing careers or financial independence, their own social media platforms function as lucrative full-time jobs. In high-profile cases, such as Nara Smith or Hannah Neeleman aka Ballerina Farm, the income generated from these platforms provides substantial financial autonomy. In other words, they encourage their audience to embrace domestic dependence while they themselves benefit from the independence and economic empowerment that come from being successful online content creators.

Question: How should we understand the responsibility of creators who produce material that echoes misogynistic ideas, and what happens to women’s safety when this kind of content sits alongside the growing visibility of NSFW work on platforms such as OnlyFans, which is often described as empowering yet may produce very different effects inside the manosphere?

Anda: I believe this connects back to the long-standing debate about whether sex work is ultimately a positive, empowering, and liberating career path for women or, conversely, whether it reinforces misogynistic and dehumanising beliefs that reduce women to sexual objects who should engage in sexual acts, regardless of discomfort or humiliation, to satisfy men’s sense of sexual entitlement.

My argument is that this debate is highly nuanced and context-dependent. Platforms such as OnlyFans have created a legitimate pathway into sex work by offering a safer environment compared to traditional, physically bound forms of sex work. They also grant women greater autonomy by allowing them to act as their own bosses rather than relying on exploitative third-party pornographic websites or agencies, many of which historically took substantial portions of creators’ earnings and, in some cases, were linked to sexual exploitation. Although platforms like OnlyFans still have significant safety concerns and cannot guarantee protection for women in this line of work, they can nonetheless provide a safer alternative and may be financially rewarding and empowering for some.

However, when discussing creators such as Bonnie Blue, I see this as a distinct phenomenon. Much of her content appears designed to shock, provoke outrage, and attract attention through deliberate self-dehumanisation. Content of this kind - including sexual material depicting extreme practices such as choking - creates the false perception that women enjoy being harmed, abused, or humiliated. This directly feeds into manosphere and incel-specific narratives claiming that women inherently want to be dominated, physically or sexually exploited, and abused by men. These narratives characterise women as promiscuous, morally inferior, and legitimate targets for male aggression within relationships and sexual encounters. Such messages distort reality and pose real danger to both young men and women, as they normalise rape myths, minimise sexual assault, and tacitly legitimise violence against women. These narratives must be challenged and actively countered.

If you’re interested, you can read more about the excellent work of Prof Clare McGlynn on extreme pornography and its harms (this briefing note, for example) and the work of Assoc Prof Alessia Tranchese and Prof Lisa Sugiura on the links between incel communities and mainstream pornography.

Question: What helps us understand why some women, including influencers, adopt positions that align with misogynistic ideas and take part in sustaining beliefs that circulate within the manosphere?

Anda: While less overtly misogynistic or directly aligned with the manosphere, “pick-me girls” do contribute to the broader anti-feminist culture. In this context, the term refers to women who actively seek male validation and approval, often by belittling or undermining other women. Although this behaviour is not new, it has gained significant visibility on social media in recent years.

In my view, this reflects a desire among some women to fit within patriarchal structures and conform to the male gaze in order to appear more desirable or attract male attention. I see this behaviour as a coping mechanism rooted in internalised misogyny, and I think it has become more prominent alongside the rise of feminist social media trends in which women hold men accountable, set clear boundaries, and articulate expectations. Some men perceive these behavioural trends as overly demanding, leading certain women to position themselves in opposition, attempting to signal that they are “not like those feminist women.”

Bringing this together with my earlier points, I believe some women perpetuate manosphere-aligned ideas for a variety of reasons: some as a means of coping or fitting in within the so-called “gender war,” and others to generate engagement, attention, and ultimately financial gain.

Question: What articles/journals/papers would you recommend for someone who’s becoming more interested in research surrounding how a diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) impacts those involved with the incel movement?

Stu: There are several good and not so good articles and research that have discussed the issue of ASD and attraction to incel ideology and the community. I would suggest reading this article by Trikkonen and Vespermann, this article by Broyd et al., and this article by Gheorghe and Clement for a good overview. We would strongly recommend avoiding any work by William Costello, especially the UK CEE report “predicting harm in incels” which is often placed first in many Google searches. His and this work reflects a broader trend to simplify the issue of incels and ASD as well as mischaracterises incels in a number of problematic ways.

Question: Can the panel suggest reliable resources that we could use within Further Education (16+) to address/reduce such behaviours?

Stu: While the government are finalising their guidance and resources for teaching around incel culture in schools, there are some web resources that can be used to guide self-directed interventions. For example, HIS offer some good guidance, as do the Global Equality Collective. If you would like to discuss the potential of working towards the design of some bespoke resources and lessons, feel free to contact stu.lucy@port.ac.uk.

Question: My 9-year-old nephew has begun using slang linked to incel and manosphere communities. He does not really understand the terms; he says he picked them up from memes, viral videos, and video games. I am concerned. When is this trend likely to fade, and what can make it less appealing?

Stu: Realistically given the limited constraints on tech companies, and the financial incentives that come from misogynistic manosphere influencing, the trend is likely to continue for some time. That said, there are a number of things you can do as a concerned relative. Ask him why he thinks this sort of language is funny and whether he agrees with what he is saying. Ask him to reflect on how this language can harm other people, for example the women and girls in his life (sisters, mother, aunt, grandmother, friends at school etc.) By linking this material to actual harm you can create a means of disarming the humour in it. Perhaps also speak to his parents and discuss the need for more control over the content he is accessing through parental locks and monitoring of his social media use.

Question: Do you believe that this online misogyny/ red pill content as an issue going to continue to rising in the coming months/ years? Or is there ever even going to be an end?

Stu: As above big tech are no in hurry to stop profiteering from the seeds of hate being sewn in this material, nor the individuals creating the content for their own personal gain. As women and marginalised groups continue to make progressive gains, tactical and strategic responses to this will inevitably continue to manifest. While some research has shown that engagement with this ideology and material is a transitory stage of adolescence and young adulthood often remedied by finding a partner, it is no guarantee that the underlying sexism and misogyny that is normalised in redpill content will not be retained in these men. Ultimately the most effective means to counter this material and movement is with collective sociopolitical, educational, and legislative resources employed with the same degree of strategic design and distribution as the enemy being faced. Schools, community leaders, and local and national government must take this issue seriously and respond with the appropriate level of vigour to mitigate this rising and persistent tide.

Question: Do you believe there is a biological factor in this systemic misogyny, or is it due to the way men have been socialised for thousands of years.

Stu: There is nothing genetic in men to be misogynistic, only a socialised privilege and entitlement to act accordingly. The system in which misogyny is systemic is socially constructed, thus it stands the misogyny within must also be too.

Question: Is part of the problem the way in which we, have in many periods in history, rigidly attach masculinity to the definition of being a man and femininity as defining being a woman, rather than communicating the different and adaptable balance of both, in all of us. Is broader acceptance and use of non-binary part of the solution therefore.

Stu: Rigid ideas of masculinity and femininity have always led to problematic social outcomes. We need to understand that it is not the performance of a particular sex assignment that itself problematic but the way we ascribe characteristics and ideals to this. That is, doing maleness is masculinity but whatever that is needn’t be fixed in such a way that characteristics not fitting this are feminised. Non-binary identities reflect a desire to move within and across these rigid dichotomies and are an effective means of overcoming the rigidity of fixed and revered ideals of masculinity and femininity. We should of course be inclusive of non-binary identities whilst also permitting masculinity and femininity to be whatever it wants to be. What a man is and isn’t (or a woman for that matter) as conceptual questions often repeated in media discourse around the ‘crisis of masculinity’ are the problem.

Question: When we look beyond the attitudes incels attribute to women, to what extent is the incel phenomenon primarily shaped by male-to-male dynamics rather than female behaviour?

Stu: The incel phenomenon is the result of several complex sociopolitical, economic and gendered factors. For sure the way men perform in a hierarchy of competing masculinities in which particular types of men are revered and celebrated in society over others plays a big part. One of the interesting things about incels is that they rightly point out impossible standards expected for men and the hierarchical placement of some masculine behaviours over others. Yet rather than questioning the system they blame women and feminism. So male-to male dynamics are a significant part of the way incels come to understand themselves (and are portrayed in media).

Question: Do you feel that a lot of people believe that feminism is anti-men and it's these ideologies that sometimes feed manosphere views of women

Stu: Feminism has always been in part portrayed as anti-men in particular media communications. Given we live in a patriarchal society any attempts by a subordinate group to upset and challenge this power dynamic will incur backlash. This is as equally true with people of colour and civil rights movements in systemically racist societies such as the UK and US. As sexism and misogyny are normalised in society, so is antifeminism. Rather than speaking of the power feminism has to support men, offering them a potential way of seeing themselves and the world that would greatly reduce their mental health issues, suicide, and substance abuse, as well as the harms they inflict on each other and women, feminism is portrayed in a reductive and combative manner. For example, if I were to mention the red-haired angry feminist meme, many people would know what I am talking about. Ask yourself why fewer people know about bell hooks... and if you’re a man reading this, go read her books.

Question: How do these misogynists spaces view men in the LGBTQ+ community

Anda: Misogynistic communities are not a monolith, so we see contradictory and opposing views within them. In my research examining various misogynistic spaces - including TikTok, YouTube, incel-specific forums, and platforms like 4chan - I have found that while some manosphere and incel-aligned individuals express pro-LGBTQ+ views or even identify as LGBTQ+ themselves, this is not representative of the broader landscape.

Across the majority of my data, LGBTQ+ identities are not viewed as innate but instead framed as a choice. A recurring narrative within my incel sample is that “unattractive men” supposedly choose to “turn” gay after realising that no women will find them desirable; homosexuality is therefore framed not as a valid sexual orientation but as an escape from involuntary celibacy. Similar logic is applied to trans women: transitioning is interpreted not as a legitimate expression of gender identity but as a supposed “life hack” for men to escape inceldom - a process referred to within these spaces as transmaxxing.

Conversely, lesbian and bisexual women are frequently dismissed as inauthentic. According to these narratives, women “pretend” to be lesbian around unattractive men but will become straight as soon as an attractive man (a “Chad”) approaches them. In essence, these communities argue that no woman is genuinely lesbian, and that bisexuality is weaponised as an easy way to reject men they deem undesirable.

Although misogynistic communities vary in their beliefs, a significant proportion promote homophobic and transphobic ideas by rejecting non-heterosexual orientations and gender identities. These narratives erase the lived experiences of LGBTQ+ individuals and contribute to the broader climate of panic, hostility, and violence currently directed at LGBTQ+ communities.

Question: How far can we understand the manosphere and incel culture as part of a wider pattern in which people form tight identity-driven groups that define themselves through the rejection of others, and does this help explain the movement of some individuals from misogynistic ideas into other forms of hostility, including the appeal of Com-style groups that target vulnerable young men?

Anda: Within criminology, we understand these groups as subcultures: cultural groups that exist within a larger society but hold beliefs, ideologies, and behaviours that differ from, or directly oppose, mainstream norms. In this sense, I do see misogynistic subcultural groups as comparable to far-right communities (including, for example, some Brexit-aligned groups), conspiracy networks, and even criminal organisations such as the 764 network. These communities function as modern-day tribes, built on shared identities, grievances, group norms, belief systems, values, and collective behaviours.

We have witnessed a significant rise in such deviant, extremist, and subcultural groups in recent years, and I argue that this trend is partly driven by the expansion of the internet and social media. These digital spaces enable communication across borders, provide instant connectivity, and allow individuals to interact anonymously. As a result, online platforms act as vehicles that bring together like-minded individuals and create self-reinforcing bubbles where harmful beliefs and behaviours are validated and amplified.

Many of these groups are interconnected through shared ideological frameworks. As discussed during the talk, misogynistic incel communities often intersect with racism and white supremacy, and several scholars (for example, Mamié and colleagues) argue that the manosphere functions as a pipeline into the far-right. In our recent paper, we show how incel content on TikTok exhibits characteristics of eugenics thinking and scientific racism.

In relation to groups that exploit children and their overlap with incel and broader manosphere spaces, my colleague Anna Meyniel from the International Centre for Missing and Exploited Children and I are currently investigating the connections between incel ideology and online child sexual exploitation communities. Our preliminary findings suggest notable intersections in both the beliefs these groups hold and the platforms they frequent. For further details, I recommend reading Anna’s article on Incel Ideology and Child Sexual Abuse Material.

Question: How should we understand the way misogynistic ideas gain strength within a political climate that presents traditional values as a solution to social change, and how does this environment allow manosphere narratives to shape debates on issues such as immigration, where claims about protecting women and children sit beside beliefs drawn from incel culture, and what evidence exists to show whether these views have taken root within mainstream political thinking?

Anda: As Wiens and colleagues argue in their excellent article for The Conversation, misogyny has increasingly become a political strategy. This is evidenced both in the policies advanced by political leaders - such as the rollback of reproductive rights in the United States - and in the rhetoric and actions of political candidates and elected officials. These messages are often subtle rather than overt (with some clear exceptions), and are often focused on education, gender identity or healthcare. As traditional conservative values gain prominence, and as anti-feminist and anti-LGBTQ+ beliefs spread through online spaces, misogyny becomes a populist mobilising force that attracts voters. For further insight, Luxton and colleagues discuss how right-wing populist parties across Europe and particularly in Germany are increasingly politicising anti-feminist positions related to gender and sexuality.

On a more positive note, social progress - whether related to women’s rights, racial minorities, or gender and sexual minorities - is often followed by backlash. It is the familiar swing of the pendulum. What we can do is continue advocating, remain resilient, and, as cliché as it may sound, embody the change we want to see in the world. Progress may come as two steps forward and one step back, but it remains progress nonetheless.

Question: How should we place Jordan Peterson within the wider landscape of ideas that frame women as a source of threat or position men as biologically suited to dominance, and how do these beliefs connect with the messages promoted by figures such as Andrew Tate?

Lisa: Jordan Peterson doesn’t quite fit into the same ideological space as people like Andrew Tate and incels/manosphere (Tate is also distinct from incels and not specifically aligned with a particular manosphere group, though he certainly has pick up artist and mens rights activist traits), but there is overlap in how their ideas are interpreted—especially online. Peterson talks more about traditional roles, personal responsibility, and natural hierarchies, he doesn’t explicitly say men should control women or that women are the enemy, but he does benefit from the support of groups that do claim this and has gained notoriety and fame from being manosphere adjacent.

Tate, on the other hand, is much more open about male dominance and treating women as subordinate. The broader ideology that men are “alphas” who should rule over women usually comes from oversimplified biology and turns gender into a power struggle, which isn’t helpful for anyone. Overall, any worldview that pits men and women against each other or claims one gender should run the other tends to create more resentment than understanding.

Question: From Elliot Rodgers to Andrew Tate, where do we keep going wrong

Lisa: We need to tackle the root cause of male violence against women and girls – misogyny. Mass murderers and misogynistic influencers are not anomalies. Violence against women and girls is not committed by ‘monsters’ but by boys and men, who are sons, brothers, husbands, fathers, friends, co-workers [here the Pelicot case applies]. They are emboldened and facilitated by societies where patriarchy and casual misogyny are normalised. Therefore, it is crucial to address the seemingly banal and everyday forms of misogyny, which provide the scaffolding to the violence that women are subjected to at the hands of men everyday.

Question: Will there be more people like Andrew Tate online?

Lisa: There are already many more grifters like him who have jumped on the bandwagon and are profiting heavily from manosphere or manosphere adjacent ideas, through speaking tours, social media income, and running courses teaching men how they can supposedly improve their lives.

Question: Are there agreed upon definitions for the terms the panel are discussing today?

Anda: There isn’t a single agreed-upon definition for terms like manosphere or incels, but academic research generally describes them in very similar ways, with only small variations. The definitions we used in the talk are aligned with this wider academic consensus.

Question: How should we understand the way manosphere ideas gain visibility on platforms such as TikTok, and what does this mean for trends like looksmaxxing, which may draw some users toward incel material without placing them directly inside that identity, and how does this environment shape the experiences of younger groups who spend much of their time in these online spaces?

Anda: Yes, I think we are seeing a clear rise in the mainstreaming of manosphere-aligned beliefs - misogyny, anti-feminism, male entitlement, and the dehumanisation of women. Content promoting these ideas has become extremely popular across male-centric podcasts, TikTok and YouTube videos, and livestreaming platforms. Social media algorithms also push this material to users, especially men, because it drives engagement.

It’s important to recognise that while social media amplifies these ideas, they resonate partly because they are not new; patriarchy and gender inequality already exist offline, so online and offline environments reinforce one another. I discuss this process more fully in my paper Mainstreaming the Blackpill.

In my most recent paper, I also argue that trends like looksmaxxing - practices aimed at optimising physical appearance - help spread and normalise certain misogynistic beliefs and link new audiences to incel spaces. I do not believe that being interested in looksmaxxing makes someone an incel, but there is growing overlap. Historically, incels rejected looksmaxxing because they viewed physical appearance as genetically fixed. Now, some incel-aligned men promote extreme techniques, such as “bonesmashing,” attempting to alter facial bone structure with blunt tools.

Looksmaxxing is currently very popular among both men and women, and many participants are unaware of its origins in manosphere and incel communities. It is normal for adolescents and young adults to care about their appearance, but it becomes harmful when pushed to extremes, such as believing physical attractiveness is the only thing that matters or blaming women for supposedly setting impossible standards that drive men toward obsessive or dangerous practices.

In short, looksmaxxing does not make someone a misogynist or a member of the manosphere, but it can draw people closer to the content, influencers, and communities that promote these ideas. Younger age groups are especially targeted by this type of content. Platforms like TikTok, which are most popular with adolescents and young adults, amplify trends such as looksmaxxing that tap directly into body-based insecurities - insecurities that are often strongest during these life stages. Harmful communities like the manosphere tend to target vulnerable individuals because they are easier to influence, and in the age of social media, young people are among the most vulnerable of all.

Question: How can misogynistic beliefs be challenged in everyday settings in ways that protect women from further risk, and what approaches give people who have started to adopt these behaviours a realistic chance to move away from them?

Lisa: An effective way to push back against misogynistic beliefs in everyday life, while keeping women safe is to focus on low-risk interventions that shift norms rather than by confronting individuals aggressively. This can look like calmly questioning harmful comments (“What do you mean by that?”), offering alternative perspectives without escalating, and modelling respectful behaviour in mixed groups. For women specifically, safety comes from picking your battles: it’s often more effective (and safer) to disengage or redirect than to challenge someone who’s clearly hostile. Allies—especially men—play a crucial role here, because they can often step in and set the tone without facing the same risks.

Helping people who fall into misogynistic behaviours usually works best through curiosity rather than confrontation. People rarely change when they feel attacked, but they can shift when someone shows them empathy, asks questions, and helps them reflect on where their beliefs come from, often insecurity, loneliness, or a desire for belonging. Offering healthier role models, supporting emotional expression, and creating spaces where men feel valued without needing to dominate others can make a huge difference. Change rarely happens from one argument; it happens from consistent exposure to healthier norms, patient conversations, and genuine connection.

Question: It was mentioned that young men try and find answers to different questions (how to be a man? how to look more masculine? Etc) and end up on the Manosphere instead of actually helpful communities and sites. How would you suggest that these helpful/safer communities become more common/easier to access so as to reduce the amount of young people becoming immersed in the Manosphere?

Stu: The issue here concerns visibility, ultimately it is more profitable for social media platforms to offer more extreme content as this draws in more views. Many men and young boys are unaware of how their access to information is curated in this way. So, while it would be, in an ideal world, great to see state sponsored pushing of healthier content in social media spaces though subsidised advertising revenues to counter that accrued by extreme content on these platforms, this is unlikely. Instead, we must educate these men and young boys on how to access and assess the right information, as well as perhaps giving guidance in schools on which content is suitable and which is problematic. The bigger issue here is that as the internet is the wild west, regardless of how much you directly offer in controlled spaces, without the digital literacy and critical thinking and analysis skills needed to evaluate new information when presented with it, when this dangerous content finds these young men and boys it will impact how they see themselves and each other, as well as women.

Question: If the manosphere is the negative spaces for young men to explore what it means to be a ‘man’ then what spaces are needed to reinforce the positive counternarratives?

Stu: For adolescents schools seem to be the ideal setting, as do community and youth group settings, such as sports teams and interest clubs. Youth clubs, now a rarity are great ways for young people to socialise and learn positive ways of performing masculinity as they develop into young adults. As mentioned many times here and in the public lecture, we cannot rely on social media to curb content that offers revenue, and while necessary, positive masculinity role models on these platforms simply do not receive the same algorithmic favour as the misogynistic manosphere material. For 18+, engaging more in the community, volunteering, continuing or starting hobbies which involve multi gender socialising in real life. Basically get off the screen and go outside!

Question: What “healthy” masculine features should we promote in place of the ones adolescents are seeking by visiting the manosphere?

Stu: We are asking the wrong question here, rather than linking particular behaviours to masculinity, as right or wrong, as toxic or healthy, we need to allow any positive characteristic, attitude, or behaviour to be in itself permitted to be performed by a man or woman. Then masculinity is not 'healthy’ or ‘unhealthy’ but just simply how men be men. This will allow in often feminised features such as cooperation, emotional communication, emotional expression, vulnerability, horizontal leadership, respect, belief in egalitarianism etc. Letting boys know it is OK to do, feel, and express things they have been historically told they must not will then break down this barrier of what a man ’is’ or should ‘be’ and end this strawman argument that seems to be hampering the progression of men, and away from the ‘crisis of masculinity’ misnomer.

Question: Do interventions such as Australia’s under-16 social media prove to be effective interventions against development of negative Manospheric ideologies?

Lisa: There can be better guardrails around what platforms young people and children can and should access. However, the ideologies will persist nonetheless and remain ready for 16-year-olds and older teenagers to engage with, who won’t have the critical digital literacy and skills to counteract them. Censorship rarely works in practice as many young people will be able to circumnavigate the age restrictions and there will even be parents who bypass them and allow their children access to social media just like those who buy 18 rated computer games for their children – especially if they are not invested in tackling these issues/ do not understand the harms. Education and empowering young people to critically challenge online content and become responsible and respectful digital citizens is key rather than an outright ban.

Question: How should we assess the risk that the Online Safety Act may drive some users away from regulated platforms and into short-lived underground spaces with little oversight, and what responses from the criminal justice sector are needed to address the influence that develops within those environments?

Lisa: Simply removing repeat offenders from sites could be ineffective as they can easily create new accounts and it is noted that user banishment from early incel forums contributed to the misogynistic incel men’s movement today and following Tate’s deplatforming, his popularity grew with other users posting his video clips. There is a risk of over-moderation driving users to other providers. This could result in a shift to closed user groups, as well as increased use of encryption technologies and the dark web where users may become more extreme. However, their commodities can be disrupted. They should not be able to charge and make money for engagement with harmful content for example. Embed safety by design principles from inception and throughout. Platforms should be prioritising designing out risks, so harmful content is not available in the first place. They should also have a better understanding of how the ecosystem of a platform can contribute to the proliferation of abuse and accordingly make preventative measures. Platforms must be held to account and enforcement action taken against them when appropriate.

Question: How can the influence of the manosphere be reduced through the work that takes place in the home, and what can educators do in primary settings to guide children away from ideas that may appear appealing at first contact?

Lisa: Parents can dilute the impact of the manosphere by building strong emotional foundations, talking openly about feelings, respect, and relationships, modelling healthy communication, and staying curious about what their kids are watching so kids feel safe discussing it. For primary-school educators, the goal isn’t to mention figures like Tate directly but to teach skills that make children more resilient later on, such as emotional literacy, empathy, critical thinking, and fair problem-solving. When children learn to express frustration, understand others’ perspectives, respect for everyone irrespective of gender, and see positive male role models who don’t rely on dominance, the more extreme “alpha” narratives will have less influence and appeal later on.

Question: At what point does incel free speech become hate speech and how can social media platforms rectify this issue?

Lisa: Freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to abuse. We should also be thinking about whose freedoms are being protected when the freedom of speech argument is being invoked. Often it is those with privilege and a platform that shout the loudest about their freedoms supposedly being infringed, whilst marginalised persons continue to be silenced and driven off platforms. Hate content needs to be recognised as such and prevented from being permitted on social media in the first place. They can block other forms of content and recognise other forms of content as harmful, so why not this?

Question: What do you think is the best way for tv to speak about these issues? As shows and storylines have become more popular but are not explored enough, what ways can tv do better to discuss these deeper topics?

Lisa: It needs to be evidentially informed and provide accurate representations that are not unduly sympathetic or victim blaming. Hold the misogynistic behaviours to account and not present the issue as novel or distinct from wider societal misogyny, or exceptionalise characters as deviant others as distinct from ordinary men.

Question: What do you think of hashtags on social media such as the NotAllMen?

Lisa: This whataboutery is unhelpful and a way of derailing conversations about men's violence against women. Of course its not all men, but it's far too many men that are not only perpetrating the violence but endorsing it or even looking the other way and allowing it to happen through tacit support. It may not be all men, but it is all women who live smaller lives because of the threat of male violence, and women don’t know which men they should fear and are conditioned to be constantly on guard regardless. This video from HASSL perfectly demonstrates the reality of women’s lives and why the not all men claim is irrelevant https://www.instagram.com/p/DRAlD_sDZZl/ Tackling Harassment: Join the HASSL Movement | TikTok

Question: What kind of laws do you think should be put in place for AI such as chatgpt to stop encouragement of negative topics?

Lisa: Laws to prevent AI from encouraging harmful topics should focus on setting clear safety and transparency standards, requiring regular independent audits for harmful or biased outputs, and placing responsibility on the companies that build and deploy AI, not on users. They should ensure strong data-privacy rules, create effective reporting and appeal systems, and block the promotion of hate or violence without censoring legitimate discussion of sensitive issues. The goal is to keep AI accountable, predictable, and safe while still allowing people to talk openly about difficult topics.