The Manosphere: Beyond the Moral Panic
How Manosphere Influencers Draw People in: The B.A.D.G.E.D. Playbook
Drawing on my work with young men and the insights of researchers who have examined the manosphere, I use the acronym B.A.D.G.E.D. to summarise a method consistently employed by some manosphere influencers to enlist and profit from followers:
B—Build up the problem: Frame ordinary developmental struggles as personal deficiency. You're not attractive enough. You're not successful enough.
A—Attack the mainstream: Position society as deceptive and hostile. You're being misled. Feminism is trying to emasculate you.
D—Deliver "hidden" knowledge: Claim to be the voice of truth in a world of lies. You've joined the awakened.
G—Gather the tribe: Create a sense of belonging and shared identity. You've joined the awakened.
E—Extract payment: Monetise the solution through courses, programmes, subscriptions and investments.
D—Drip-feed reminders: Keep the threat alive. Stay sharp. Society will try to trick you.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-tools-for-thriving/202609/the-manosphere-beyond-the-moral-panicOpen linkView original on lemmy.today
11 replies
This sounds like a good way of describing some other forms of radicalisation too, such as the global, online far-right grooming operation.
Yeah, it's essentially the right wing influenced playbook. Alex Jones is a good example, minus the B.
What's different between this group and any other cult? It seems like they're using the exact same tactics.
I believe that's the subtext here.
All this stuff seems so cringe-worthy to me that it's been hard to wrap my head around it since forever. But... the basic idea is to prey on unhappy (youngish) men, yes?
I would also tend to think that general ignorance and lack of context & empathy would also factor in. They don't know what they don't know, and don't care to learn. They want what they want and are happy to be empowered by others of their belief, even if they're sometimes being grifted.
Anyway, that's my working hypothesis.
It starts with trying to make them more unhappy in the first place. A regular man who thinks it's impossible to find a date might just be having the average experience, but the manosphere concocts a problem where there is none. It might suggest he isn't attractive, that only the top 10% of men actually attract women, and he's hopeless — before offering a paid pick up artist class as a solution.
And demeaning women as a part of that process. It's such bullshit, but also vile bullshit.
In my study and contemplations of history, I've come to understand that civilisation and even larger-scale agriculture itself was something of a power grab, immediately creating hierarchy, haves and have-nots, and magnifying other kinds of differences. It was the rise of the Patriarchy I think, and when men today and throughout history refer to 'traditional values' and similar crap, I believe it recapitulates that kind of original power grab.
I'm a bit under-read on tribal / clan anthropology, and especially how it relates to the long history of genus Homo (which goes back ~2.5Myrs), but my working belief is that humanity across history mostly didn't and couldn't function as a patriarchy. So the actual 'tradition' would be people living in much more equalized (and small) situations, because cooperation and goodwill was more important than power.
Eheh, sorry for the essay.
@JohnnyEnzyme You may read this: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/833
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The/_Theory/_of/_the/_Leisure/_Class
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/833
I'm getting a 404 when I follow that link. What is it about?
@JohnnyEnzyme The links are the wikipedia article about "The theory of the leasure class" by Thornstein Veblen and the text of the book from project Gutemberg. Strange that they don't work.
The book, over 100 years old, explains how human societies developped a class of unproductive tyrans.
Okay, I found it based on that. Thanks very much!