Work with us
The Effects of Failure, Sean Alistair

A public health response to the manosphere

The manosphere is not a passing backlash. It is an organised, networked and often highly profitable ecosystem that thrives on existing inequality, and it demands a public health response.

What is the manosphere?

The manosphere is a loose network of online communities, from men’s rights activists and incels to pick-up artists and ‘red pill’ content creators, united by a belief that feminism has disadvantaged men. It is also a commercial ecosystem. Creators and platforms profit from advertising, subscriptions and paid content, algorithms reward outrage, and young users are sold courses, surgeries and investment schemes that monetise their insecurities.

This is a business model, not a fringe. Outrage and grievance are good for business, so the system rewards the most extreme content. Public health has a tested toolkit for commercial harms and we should use it.
Professor Kent Buse, co-founder, Global 50/50

Why is the manosphere a public health issue?

As argued by our Co-CEOs in the Lancet, it is time the manosphere is recognised as a public health issue. The manosphere is an under-recognised determinant of health harms, and has been implicated in mental health problems, especially in young people; in violence against women, girls and gender minorities; and in discouraging boys and men from seeking help.

Rigorous causal evidence is still scarce, but the manosphere is associated with these harms, both directly and indirectly. Its narratives of dominance and entitlement normalise misogynistic attitudes and heighten the risk of violence against women, girls and gender-diverse people. Boys and men caught up in it can become trapped in narratives of grievance, fatalism and stigma against asking for help.

Why are boys and men drawn in?

Boys are disengaging from education in many parts of the world, and many boys and young men face loneliness, social exclusion and economic insecurity. Boys and men, particularly those marginalised by social and structural drivers, also experience substantial unmet need from health policies, systems and services.

The manosphere redirects blame for these problems to women and feminism rather than the structural and economic forces responsible, and for some it offers what mainstream institutions have not: belonging, identity and a coherent explanation for failure.

Why is removing content not enough?

Content moderation alone is not enough. Restricting content does nothing to address the unmet needs that make the manosphere’s explanation attractive in the first place.

Like the tobacco and ultra-processed food industries, content creators and hosting platforms deploy strategies that individualise responsibility, putting the blame on individuals rather than systems. Efforts to regulate or moderate content are frequently framed as threats to men’s autonomy.

Framing the manosphere as a public health problem shifts the focus from content moderation, access safeguards and algorithm diversion to the underlying drivers of harm. The harms to boys and men, to women and girls, and to wider society provide a clear basis for action.

Professor Sarah Hawkes interviewed for sky news
The manosphere offers boys and young men belonging, identity and an explanation for why life feels hard. Those needs are real. A response that only removes the manosphere, without offering something credible in its place, will fail.
Professor Sarah Hawkes, co-founder, Global 50/50

Our work on the manosphere

What a public health response to the manosphere involves

Public health has tackled other complex and contested problems, including gender-based violence and drug use. It does this by going after the underlying social, structural and commercial causes; reducing stigma and discrimination; shifting public narratives and attitudes; widening fair access to services; and relying less on policing and punishment as the main response.

A public health response starts with the root causes. It combines prevention aimed at whole populations, education, changing social norms and stronger health and social systems, alongside regulation and financial measures. The Viewpoint proposes six priorities:

  1. Tackle the root causes. Address the educational disengagement, isolation and economic insecurity that leave boys and young men vulnerable, through action on health, education, employment and finance.
  2. Work across sectors. Health services, schools and other services that reach boys and young men should work together. School programmes can build emotional skills and healthy relationships.
  3. Communicate without blame. Avoid framing masculinity as inherently toxic or boys and men as inherently problematic. Co-design messages with boys and men, and use ‘pre-bunking’ – warning people about harmful content before they meet it – delivered by trusted peers.
  4. Regulate platforms and structures, not users. Target the structures and incentives that generate harm, as tobacco control did, rather than the individuals exposed to them.
  5. Monitor and evaluate. Invest in tracking evolving digital ecosystems, and in finding out what works and what has unintended consequences.
  6. Confront misogyny. The manosphere did not create misogyny, but it could be normalising and amplifying it. Tackle the underlying misogyny and the well-funded anti-gender movements that support the conditions in which it thrives.

This is a political, legal, economic and social challenge demanding coordinated, sustained action on multiple fronts, and a public health framing can unlock such an approach.

The Organised Many

The manosphere did not invent misogyny, but it is amplifying it. It thrives in political conditions that a wider, well-resourced opposition to gender justice helps to sustain, which is why the Viewpoint ends by calling for those movements to be confronted. The Organised Many sets out how the movement can respond.

The organised many: A gender justice agenda for action

In the news

See more media coverage

Speak to our experts

Professors Sarah Hawkes and Kent Buse, authors of the Viewpoint, are available for interview and briefings. For media, policy and partnership enquiries, contact anna.purdie@global5050.org.
Request an interview

Professor Sarah Hawkes

Professor of Global Public Health and Co-CEO, Global 50/50

Professor Sarah Hawkes

Professor of Global Public Health and Co-CEO, Global 50/50

Professor Kent Buse

Professor of Health Policy and Co-CEO, Global 50/50

Professor Kent Buse

Professor of Health Policy and Co-CEO, Global 50/50