Examining incel subculture on Reddit

ABSTRACT

The online presence of incels, or involuntary celibates, has been an increasing security concern for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers in recent years, given that self-identified incels – including Alek Minassian and Elliot Rodger – used the Internet to disseminate incel ideology and manifestos prior to committing acts of violence. However, little is empirically known about the incel movement in general or their online communities in particular. The present study draws from a set of comments from r/Incels, a now defunct but once popular subreddit dedicated to the incel community, and compares the most highly-upvoted comments (n = 500) to a random set of other comments (n = 500) in the subreddit. This qualitative analysis focuses on identifying subcultural discourse that is widely supported and engaged with by members of the online community and the extent to which incels utilize this online space to reaffirm deviant behavior. Our study underscores the importance, as well as the difficulties, of drawing from online sources like web-forums to generate new knowledge on deviant communities and behaviors. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of this analysis, its limitations, and avenues for future research.

KEYWORDS:

• Incel
• online
• subculture
• misogyny
• qualitative

Introduction

Online communities and subcultures have been of increasing interest for scholars, particularly those which contribute to deviant and extremist beliefs (Holt, Freilich, and Chermak 2017; Holt 2010, 2020; O’Malley, K. Holt, and T., 2020), as well as the ways extremist movements utilize the Internet to advance their cause (Conway 2017; Gill et al. 2017; Scrivens, Gill, and Conway 2020). The Internet has provided a space for individuals to share their grievances, frustrations, and desires, as well as seek out support and develop interpersonal relationships. Online communities provide some level of anonymity, empowering individuals to express viewpoints and perspectives that they may otherwise withhold due to a fear of social sanctions from peers or social rejection (Holt, Freilich, and Chermak 2017; McCauley and Moskalenko 2011; Simi and Futrell 2015).

This is particularly relevant for subcultures formed within the extant manosphere – a ‘loose confederacy’ (Ging 2019) of men’s rights and misogynistic groups that have become interconnected through blogs, forums, and online communities (see Nagle 2017). Incels, a portmanteau for involuntary celibates and subculture within the manosphere, have come to the attention of scholars (e.g., Baele, Brace, and Coan 2019; Ging 2019; Hoffman, Ware, and Shapiro 2020; Hoffman and Ware 2020), government agencies (e.g., Texas DPS 2020; U.S. DOJ 2021), and policy developers (e.g., Moonshot 2019, 2020) alike in recent years, in part due to the notoriety of incel-associated acts of violence over the past decade. However, little is empirically known about how incels utilize online spaces (e.g., Reddit, YouTube, incel-dedicated sites, etc.) and, like other extremist movements, there is a need for further investigation into how they operate and utilize online platforms to maintain subculture values and enculturate new members (O’Malley, Holt, and Holt 2020).

Mainstream social platforms, such as Reddit, are both highly accessible and can be a tool for facilitating the exchange of radical ideas and beliefs on a global scale (Gaudette, Scrivens et al. 2020). Unlike dedicated-hate sites and forums, Reddit houses users of various backgrounds and interests while enabling the development of extremist subcultures (e.g., r/The_Donald, r/MGTOW, etc.), such as r/Incels (Farrell et al. 2019; Mamié, Ribeiro, and West 2021; Ribeiro et al. 2020). Extremist discourse within incel subreddit communities is often framed as conducive to user radicalization and migration to more extreme platforms (Farrell et al. 2019; Mamié, Horta Ribeiro, and West 2021; Ribeiro et al. 2020, 2020b). For instance, Mamié and colleagues (2021) found that r/Incels users – as well as pick-up artist, men going their own way, and men’s rights activists subreddit members – are more likely to migrate to alt-right subreddits than users engaging with incel content on YouTube. This finding suggests that Reddit encapsulates a distinct phenomena wherein manosphere communities may serve as a gateway community to other fringe extremist subcultures (see Mamié, Horta Ribeiro, and West 2021).

Although many manosphere communities share a large portion of their user-base (Mamié, Horta Ribeiro, and West 2021; Ribeiro et al. 2020b), research indicates that there is a significant pattern of users migrating from older communities (e.g., pick up artists, men’s rights activists) to newer and more toxic ones (e.g., men going their own way). Research suggests that incel communities, specifically, are of the most toxic manosphere communities with the most salient violent discourse (Ribeiro et al. 2020a, 2020b). Researchers have similarly found that misogynistic content, users, and violent attitudes towards women have been increasing within online incel communities, including related subreddits (see Farrell et al. 2019).

As a movement, incels exist and correspond almost exclusively online, but mainstream platforms, such as Reddit, may be more likely to serve as a source of initial exposure to incel subculture. Here research suggests that users may be unintentionally exposed to hateful content online through mainstream platforms (see Reichelmann et al. 2020). Hate content within incel subreddit communities has raised concerns due to the drastic difference in worldviews between subculture members (e.g., incels) and non-incel observers, primarily the risk of heightened hostility from incel subreddit members (see Maxwell et al. 2020). Examining the ways in which users share subcultural values on Reddit provides insight into how mainstream platforms contribute to the enculturation of new or less established members of incel subculture. Investigating how users engage with and are enculturated into incel subculture online may assist efforts in redirecting vulnerable users towards resources and support (e.g., mental health services).

Subcultural values and online enculturation

The Internet has revolutionized the way we communicate and interact with one another and has become an increasingly fundamental part of modern society. Websites and forums provide users with access to like-minded individuals and communities that may otherwise be hidden in physical environments (Bowman-Grieve 2009; Freiburger and Crane 2008; Holt and Blevins 2007; Holt 2007), such as customers of sex workers (Blevins and Holt 2009) and pedophiles (Holt, Blevins, and Burkert 2010). Extremist subcultures also flourish in online spaces due to accessibility and limited regulation, as well as the benefits of greater anonymity, recruitment tools, and a consistent medium for communication (Bowman-Grieve 2009; Hale 2012; O’Malley, Holt, and Holt 2020; Weimann 2004).

Online communities may be particularly appealing to individuals who feel outcast or isolated in their offline lives, as communities can provide vulnerable individuals with support and validation (Tina and Crane 2008; Goldsmith and Brewer 2015; Holt 2007; McCauley and Moskalenko 2011). This is especially the case for those who hold beliefs distinct from mainstream values and who may otherwise refrain from sharing their perspectives with others offline (Tina and Crane 2008; Holt, Freilich, and Chermak 2017; Bowman-Grieve 2009). The Internet also gives users the ability to drift between their engagement in online deviant subcultures and mainstream society offline (Goldsmith and Brewer 2015).

As a consequence, online environments engender the development of a common worldview that coalesces around symbolic frames that make meaning of shared grievances (Koehler 2014). Bowman-Grieve (2009) conceptualized this dynamic as a virtual community of practice, where participants ‘interact in a meaningful community-driven way’ (Bowman-Grieve 2009, p. 1005), and on a very personal level. Established and regular users are able to use these spaces to not only communicate with others but to promote the group’s beliefs, creating space for teaching new members, and validating ideological beliefs and worldviews that align with that of the group (Bowman-Grieve 2009). As a result, the bonds formed within virtual communities provide individuals with a sense of comradery and support, increasing the likelihood of users becoming more engaged and committed to the group-ideology (Bowman-Grieve 2009; Tina and Crane 2008; Holt, Freilich, and Chermak 2017).

Not only can the Internet serve as a catalyst for radicalization, but also the Internet is strategically used by extremist movements to recruit, communicate, and socialize co-ideologues (Bowman-Grieve 2009; Conway 2017; Gerstenfeld, Grant, and Chiang 2003). In short, radicalization is ‘cyber-enabled’ rather than ‘cyber-dependent’ (Gill et al. 2017). In a similar capacity, enculturation into a subculture relies on personal acceptance of the prescribed norms and values (see Holt 2020) as well as specialized knowledge and codes of conduct that then have to be consciously engaged with in order to symbolize subculture membership and status (Holt 2010; Lerman 1967). While individuals may be exposed to extremist subcultures through their use of the Internet, their likelihood of being radicalized is dependent on personal characteristics, experiences, and social networks that may influence the mechanisms by which it occurs (Holt, Freilich, and Chermak 2017; McCauley and Moskalenko 2011; Simi and Futrell 2015; Taylor and Horgan 2006). Individuals who are emotionally vulnerable or experiencing personal crises are more likely to open themselves up to alternative worldviews and ideologies that justify extremist action (Holt, Freilich, and Chermak 2017; McCauley and Moskalenko 2011; Taylor and Horgan 2006), a process that is made easier to access and engage with online.

Examining incel subculture

Incel communities in online environments are an excellent example of the potential ways in which individuals may radicalize to shared grievances due to engagement with others (Ribeiro et al. 2020a, 2020b). Self-identified incels coalesce online to discuss shared experiences of social isolation, loneliness, and difficulties attaining sexual relationships due to (actual or perceived) social and physical shortcomings (Ging 2019; Jaki et al. 2019). Incels standout within the broader manosphere due to their blackpill philosophy, a fatalistic worldview that rests on the notion that to be an incel is to fall into a naturally occurring category within society. There is no hope for incels to gain approval from women or be accepted by society as a result (Bratich and Banet-Weiser 2019; Cottee 2021; Hoffman, Ware, and Shapiro 2020).

Inceldom is built upon an ideological foundation of gender essentialism dictating superiority over women and traditional gender roles that reiterate male entitlement (Ging 2019; Mountford 2018). Female empowerment and modern feminism are seen as contributing to a sexual hierarchy that disadvantages men – particularly incels – and gives women unearned dominance and status within the sexual economy (O’Malley, Holt, and Holt 2020; van Valkenburgh 2018). When incels are unable to achieve the aforementioned goals and characteristics of traditional masculinity, their failures are attributed to the state of society and modern feminism, contributing to a convoluted sense of feminism-induced victimhood (Baele, Brace, and Coan 2019; Chang 2020; Marwick and Lewis 2018; 2017; Preston, Halpin, and Maguire 2021).

Feelings of deprivation and disenfranchisement are conducive to the formation of an incel subculture in response to what is seen as feminism-induced oppression. Incels are able to bond over a shared desire for relationships and sexual opportunities as well as other facets of their lives that may contribute to feelings of hopelessness. For instance, participants often speak of a lack of educational or employment opportunities (e.g., ‘NEET’¹), financial difficulties (Jelodar and Fran 2021), or struggles with mental health and self-care (Glace, Dover, and Zatkin 2021; Jaki et al. 2019). Incels have been found to attribute blame for their marginalization onto factors such as neuro-atypicality, physical stature, and other characteristics that lend themselves towards traditional masculine performance, collectively contributing to a sense of strained masculinity (Daly and Reed 2022). In finding like-minded individuals, incels are able to find a community that they may otherwise lack, as well as express thoughts and feelings that may be in conflict with mainstream societal values. Incel communities may be attractive to disenfranchised young men who are seeking out sources of validation or support and are given a radicalized framework that facilitates anger and misogynistic attitudes towards women (see O’Malley, Holt, and Holt 2020).

The extant literature points towards a progression in extremist beliefs and radical sentiment across incel platforms (Farrell et al. 2019, 2020; Jaki et al. 2019; Ribeiro et al. 2020a, 2020b), as well as the potential for users to not only become violent but to also be martyred by incel peers after the fact (Baele, Brace, and Coan 2019; Jaki et al. 2019; Witt 2020). Since participants often encourage one another to commit acts of violence (Jaki et al. 2019; Robertson 2019), the communities have been banned on some mainstream social platforms (see Bell 2017). Research has similarly found that incel communities are characterized by virulent misogyny that justifies the use of violence, particularly against women (Baele, Brace, and Coan 2019; Ging 2019; Jaki et al. 2019). Importantly, individuals who frequently engaged with incel communities online have perpetrated offline acts of violence (Bell, Russell, and McDonald 2020; Hoffman and Ware 2020; Williams et al. 2021), such as Elliot Rodger in 2014 (BBC 2018), Alek Minassian (Goodyear 2018), and Christopher Harper Mercer (Healy and Lovett 2015). More recently, a self-proclaimed incel was intercepted by local law enforcement in the U.S. after having written a manifesto detailing violent intent, obtained weapons and body armor, and having scouted on-campus sororities at a nearby university (U.S. DOJ 2021). Plots for offline violence reiterate the ongoing threat of incels and risks posed by extremist incel subculture online.

The present study

Despite being a mainstream social platform, research suggests that incel communities on Reddit, for example, tend to be more toxic than their manosphere counterparts (Riberiro et al. 2020a, 2020b) and conducive to greater radicalization and migration among the manosphere user-base (Farrell et al. 2019; Mamié, Horta Ribeiro, and West 2021; Ribeiro et al. 2020a, 2020b). The accessibility of mainstream social platforms may exacerbate the risk of vulnerable users being drawn in and radicalized within incel subculture, as opposed to dedicated hate sites and forums that may require knowledge or guidance from established members to access. Examining the ways in which incels espouse subcultural values and beliefs on platforms such as Reddit can give us greater insight into the enculturation process of potential incel community members within a mainstream social platform. The results add to a growing body of evidence that helps us understand how the Internet is being used to share, inculcate, and promote extremist values.

Data and methods

This study is one of the first to explore highly upvoted content in the r/Incels subreddit in order to identify patterns in the content that receives greater engagement and promotion from the r/Incels subreddit community. The purpose of examining upvoted content was to explore what makes highly upvoted content unique relative to other comments in this space. Upvoted content represents an evaluation of the nature of the content in this space, symbolically denoting what views are accepted (or unaccepted) and preferred (see Davis and Graham, 2021; Gaudette, Scrivens, and Davies, 2020). Before being banned in November 2017, the r/Incels subreddit had approximately 40,000 members (Bell 2017b; Hauser 2017) and was receiving upwards of 3,000 daily posts and comments (Ribeiro et al. 2020).

For this study, publicly accessible Reddit data consisting of comments made within the r/Incels subreddit were used. All open-source content during this time frame on r/Incels was captured by one of the authors using a custom-written computer program that was designed to collect vast amounts of information online (for more information on the web-crawler, see Scrivens et al. 2019). In total, the web-crawler extracted approximately 1.4 million comments made by approximately 45,000 authors between January 2014 and November 2017.

There are two sets of comments examined in this analysis, and our selection procedure mirrors a recent analysis of comments within far-right subreddits (Gaudette et al. 2020). First, we selected the first 500 most highly upvoted user-submitted comments in the data (hereafter referred to as the ‘highly-upvoted set’). The second set of comments comprised of 500 user-submitted comments, randomly sampled from the rest of the comments to serve as a comparison to the highly-upvoted set (hereafter referred to as the ‘random set’). Utilizing two samples will allow for the identification of discourse that is unique to highly-upvoted content and elucidate areas of disagreement among subculture members that may otherwise be overlooked if only the highly-upvoted content were to be used.

There are several noteworthy observations across both sets (Table 1). First, both the highly upvoted and random sets consisted of a similar number of unique authors (400 and 348, respectively). Second, not surprisingly, there were a greater number of comments within the highly upvoted set that were thread starters (65.7%) compared to the random set (35.2%). For this data a ‘thread starter’ comment was any that began a series of comments posted back and forth between users. Third, and as expected, there were significant differences in the range of scores for comments in the upvoted and random sets. The maximum score for a comment within the upvoted set (1,022) was much higher than that of the random set (56), as well as the minimum score values (75 and −19, respectively). On average, an upvoted set comment had a score value of approximately 120 while an average score in the random set fell to −19, wherein a negative value indicates majority downvotes from other users.

Table 1. Descriptive information of the sets.

	Unique Authors (%)	Thread-Starting Comments (%)	Vote Scores
			Min.	Max	Mean
Highly Upvoted Set (N = 500)	400 (80.0%)	328 (65.7%)	75	1022	121
Random Set (N = 500)	348 (69.6%)	176 (35.2%)	−19	56	4.7

These comments were analyzed using thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke 2006). In particular, the data were categorized using descriptive coding. The lead author coded the data in a series of waves with input from the co-authors. Specifically, the lead author conducted a preliminary analysis of a smaller sample of comments and shared those with the coauthors. After consultation, the lead author then coded the entire sample, including those in the preliminary sample, using thematic analysis techniques (Braun and Clarke 2006). After open coding the sample to identify recurring ideas and themes, a second wave of coding was carried out to begin forming coding categories (Elo and Kyngäs, 2008). Coding categories were refined using a reiterative and ongoing process while coding and reflecting upon the data (see Saldaña 2009; see also Maguire and Delahunt 2017). Through this process, emergent subthemes were identified as coding categories were refined during a third wave of coding. Finally, coded comments and subthemes were reviewed, and broader themes were identified. Specifically, after we reviewed each user comment in the highly upvoted set and random set, thematic codes were assigned to the comments. This descriptive coding technique proceeded in a sequential, line-by-line manner (see Maher et al. 2018), which was a suitable choice for the current study because it allowed us to organize vast amount of textual data into manageable word/topic-based clusters.

Findings

Our thematic analysis identified four dominant themes in the sets: incel perspectives, propensity for change, conflict, and deviance. Each of the themes will be discussed using in-vivo quotes from users within the set. In keeping with prior qualitative online analyses, the usernames of users are excluded from this presentation to provide a modicum of privacy to participants (see Holt and Blevins 2014; Silverman 2013). All online comments were quoted verbatim.

Incel perspectives

Across both sets of comments, detailing what it means to ‘truly’ be an incel were widespread, with comments outlining the reason for individual membership as well as the characteristics differentiating incels from other manosphere communities.

Unlike other manosphere communities, incels adhering to the blackpill see true inceldom as unsolvable without drastic societal change. For instance, one user’s highly-upvoted comment explained:

Unlike what the pickup artists, redpillers AND many bluepillers say, attraction isn’t rocket science. She either likes you or she doesn’t. If she likes you, there’s like [nothing] you can do wrong. If she doesn’t, there’s little you can do right. You can’t make someone sexually disinterested become interested. You can only bribe her with status/wealth, in which case she may feign ‘attraction,’ and there are plenty of naïve men who fall for it. (UserID: 628, 123)²

Attributing blame for the incel predicament on broader external factors, rather than an individual’s inability to adapt or make specific changes to themselves, is an essential worldview to be considered a true, ‘blackpilled’ incel. As one user who posted a random-set comment argues, ‘Sexual liberation is the same type of snakeoil that trickle down economics is. It will never work, the good looking elite will just monopolize sex for themselves.’ (UserID: 210, 6). In short, despite whatever growth incels aspire to have in sexual value, there will always be men who have a greater sexual value and who women are more preoccupied with getting attention from.

Symptomatic of the blackpill ideology, users encouraged a sort of nihilistic acceptance, wherein incels are considered inherently less desirable than other men and will forever exist in a society where women are seen as exploiting and disrespecting men. For members who are not completely without hope, referring to themselves as incel can garner negative responses. One random-set user declared, ‘a true incel, i can respect that. so sick of all these fakecels running around calling themselves incels. they’re not better than [normif*gs]’ (UserID: 1287, 2). Overall, there is a persistent theme within incel ideology that normies are in denial about the state of society – the antithesis of the blackpill. As one user’s highly-upvoted comment explained:

It’s safe to assume by now that even normies know they’re full of shit. They know it and they know we know it how full of shit they are. Those times they come here and sperg³ cope⁴ shit is their attempt to cling to their cope. They’re not trying to convince us we’re wrong but want to use the opportunity to keep reaffirming their cope. (UserID: 898, 109)

The Poor Moral Character of Women

For many incels, normie-denial of the blackpill and inequality within the romantic and sexual economy perpetuates a problem that mainstream society created – women, in particular. Across both sets, women were generalized as being naturally evil and hedonistic, at times using a biological essentialist lens to define the poor moral character of women. As illustrated in a highly-upvoted comment:

… I wonder why females are so evil honestly. They sent Ted bundy love letters and also Richard ramirez. How degenerate can they be? I wonder what happens in the womb that makes every female so fucking shallow evil picky and racist. Every female regardless of their looks and personality is like this, they just lie in different ways. (UserID: 545, 193)

Women’s power in society was often seen as being facilitated by the complacency of normie and Chad-men, who are preoccupied with their own ability to appease and receive sexual favoritism from women over their incel counterparts. Commonly discussed within both the highly upvoted and random sets included the depiction of women as inherently shallow and as being enabled by a hypergamous society. One comment by a user in the random-set explains, ‘society simply values a woman’s happiness over a man’s, they don’t care there’s a tradeoff in happiness from men to women when you give women sexual freedom. The state of things right now are just as morally corrupt as a society where women are subservient and crawl on all fours like dogs, owned by a man’ (UserID: 237a, 2).

There were, however, significant differences regarding the nature of such membership across the different sets of comments (see Table 2). For example, comments that shared incel ideology were much more prevalent within the random set (30%) than the highly upvoted set (8.6%), as well as related comments that presented user beliefs about women (21.2% and 10.2%, respectively).

Table 2. Thematic analysis categories across sets.

Thematic Category	Highly Upvoted Set (N = 500)	Random Set (N = 500)
Incel Perspectives
Pill Ideology	43 (8.6%)	150 (30.0%)
Gender Beliefs	51 (10.2%)	106 (21.2%)
Double Standard	22 (43.1%)	15(14.2%)
Hypersexual	9 (17.6%)	27 (25.5%)
Evil/Shallow	15 (29.4%)	28 (26.4%)
Egocentric/Enabled	3 (5.9%)	8 (7.5%)
Misc.	2 (3.9%)	28 (26.4%)
Propensity for Change
Emotional Expression	18 (3.6%)	82 (16.4%)
Propensity for Change	100 (20.0%)	81 (16.2%)
Promoting	61 (61.0%)	50 (61.7%)
Dismissive	39 (39.0%)	31 (38.3%)
Conflict
Corrections	103 (20.6%)	45 (9.0%)
Pseudoscience	34 (33.0%)	5 (11.1%)
Perspectives	69 (67.0%)	40 (88.9%)
Arguing	143 (28.6%)	93 (18.6%)
Hypocrisy	29 (20.3%)	11 (11.8%)
Ad Hominem	78 (54.5%)	59 (63.4%)
Respect	8 (5.6%)	4 (4.3%)
Misc.	28 (19.6%)	19 (20.4%)
Online Deviance and Insinuated Harm
Deviance	23 (4.6%)	59 (11.8%)
Violent/Harmful	4 (17.4%)	17 (28.8%)
Deviant/Inappropriate	9 (39.1%)	21 (35.6%)
Discrimination/Prejudice	8 (34.8%)	17 (28.8%)
Misc.	2 (8.7%)	4 (6.8%)
Shaming Deviance	37 (7.4%)	8 (1.6%)

A Woman’s Worth

Although women are described as being evil and egocentric across both the highly upvoted (29.4% and 5.9%, respectively) and random (26.4% and 7.5%, respectively) sets, a difference worthy of attention is apparent. Comments expressing users’ beliefs about women within the upvoted set were more likely to be framed within the context of a double standard (43.1%), either between men and women or men vying for women’s affection, than they were in the random set (14.2%). The double standard is particularly palpable among users comparing women’s treatment of Chads to that of incels. In an effort to highlight this perceived double standard, one user who posted a highly-upvoted comment wrote from a hypothetical woman’s perspective: ‘”FUCKING PRICKS QUIT TREATING ME LIKE I’M AN OBJECT!”, “Oh, yes Chad. Slap me around, treat me like the object I am!” Literally women in a nutshell’ (UserID: 28, 87). Oftentimes, users wrote about double standards benefiting women, particularly their unearned power in society. Outside of their sexuality, incel critiques of unearned status were frequently underscored by a fundamental belief that women’s worth is less than that of men. For instance, in the random set one user wrote:

Females do not deserve equal rights because they are not equal. They do not contribute as much to building and maintaining society. Yet they draw more benefits from having a society. Males sacrifice the freedom of violence to build and maintain society. Females sacrifice the freedom of sexuality to build/maintain society. Females are not nearly as gifted at violence, nor do they need it. They can manipulate and trade their sex for endless things. Childbirth is NOT a contribution since female humanoid organisms would do that in the wild without a society … (UserID: 347, 5).

Conversely, user comments about women in the random set were more likely to hypersexualize women (25.5%) compared to the upvoted set (17.6%). In one instance, a user who posted a random-set comment asserted, ‘Because they don’t care about the consequences in the moment, all they can think about is how to get Chad’s cock inside them’ (UserID: 874, 11). Female sexuality is overwhelming equated with being hurtful to ‘good’ or worthy men. The same user who argued for removing equal rights went on to explain that women’s sexual freedom prevents them from providing societal contributions:

Raising the children with a father? That’s a contribution. Not being a slut thus keeping society stable? That’s a contribution. Not being a bitch who thinks she can equal men thus creating hatred between the sexes? That’s a contribution. Females don’t do those things anymore. Females are toxic assholes who are filled with cancer and endless lust for superior males. Revoke all female rights. Look at how fucking cancerous and greedy females have become in less than 100 years of feminism. So toxic and evil. Down with feminism, down with female rights. (UserID: 347, 5)

As evidenced by this particular comment, users often hyper sexualized women to the point of dehumanization. In this capacity, one author concisely announced in their random-set comment, ‘You are cunts. You made us’ (UserID: 511, 1). In turn, these dynamics justified the develop of a strong out-group delineation between incels and those they see as the source of incel-struggles.

Propensity for change

Despite the virulent misogyny, users frequently shared their incel worldview by personalizing it with examples from their life, often through emotional expressions of frustration, loneliness, and hopelessness. Emotional expressions were less prominent in the upvoted set (3.6%) compared to the random set (16.4%). One user’s random-set comment expressed sympathy with another user, writing, ‘iktf⁵ bro, I already gave up. Why bother when 90% of men are more handsome than you? I’m going to see how long I can last, maybe I’ll get to see some cool things like intelligent AI, humanoid robots and ww3. I can always kill myself when I’ve had enough’ (UserID: 647, 2). Another user in their random-set comment explained, ‘ … Would you expect an orphan dog to be kind to its first owners? Not naturally. Would you expect a battered woman to feel comfortable and safe? Then why do they treat our years of abuse as detestable and fake?’ (UserID: 622, 8). These emotion-based comments led to responses from normies observing the forums, ranging from encouragement and empathy to disappointment and rejection. While some users validated negative incel emotions, others attempted to reframe incels’ perspective and outlook on their life. This discourse was more frequent within the highly-upvoted set, indicating greater diversity in worldview and ideology. These comments ultimately shared the sentiment that the solution to incels’ struggles are fundamental changes to their mindset and behaviors. Posters who self-identified as non-incel (i.e., normie or ‘lurker’) additionally emphasized incels’ need to develop a willingness to accept help and make fundamental changes, soliciting both hostile and vulnerable responses from incel users.

A notable theme was that of improvement and the ability of incels to change, both in their lives and worldview. Incel propensity for change was derived from two recurring ideas: that incels are ‘too far gone’ to help or that incels may benefit from social support. Incel propensity for change was slightly more prevalent within the highly upvoted set (20.0%) than it was in the random set (16.2%). On numerous occasions, posters would express disappointment and concern for incels, at times offering to provide them with friendship and support. Reflected in one highly-upvoted comment, users share sentiments such as, ‘You can’t help those that don’t want to help themselves. If any of you ever need someone to talk to you can always shoot me a message. I hope you all have a splendid day’ (UserID: 1442, 217).

Surprisingly, comments encouraging improvement and incels’ ability to change were more prominent across both sets of data, compared to those rejecting incels’ ability or desire to change. Within the most-highly upvoted set, subreddit support (61.0%) was much more frequent than rejection (39.0%). To demonstrate, a user’s highly-upvoted comment provided validation and encouragement in sharing, ‘I’m a lurker and I don’t hate you. I’m sure you are just angry and frustrated with life, I hope things get better for you’ (UserID: 1435, 87). However, users often grouped incels as either hostile or as those who can change. In another highly-upvoted comment, one user, in response to an incel, stated:

My comment wasn’t for the people here like you, who are destined to be alone forever due to their hostility and hatred for anyone who tries to show a shred of kindness. It was for the lonely guys who still have human decency underneath all their rage and hate. There’s hope for those guys. Everyone else has dug their own grave by alienating anyone who tries to sympathize or reach out. (UserID: 830, 115)

Users often rejected hostile incels as having gone too far and unable to change. In a highly-upvoted comment, one user shared, ‘Some of these people are beyond help. Their situations are their own fault but they blame everyone and everything else’ (UserID: 317, 93), while another echoes this sentiment stating, ‘don’t bother posting here these guys gave up ages ago’ (UserID: 426, 125). On several occasions users would post comments about the sarcastic advice given by incels within the subreddit and how, despite being great advice, it was indicative of incels’ inability to change. As explained by one user in a highly-upvoted comment, ‘95% of this is good advice, the fact that this was written sarcastically says a lot about this sub’ (UserID: 1450, 141).

Perceptions of Legitimacy and Achievability

Additionally, former incels were observed as providing a perspective that may have added legitimacy due to their shared experience of inceldom. In a random-set comment, one former incel wrote, ‘No that’s not it. I am looking for an incel to transform irl.⁶ I know how hard It is, and I want to help someone get the help I never did’ (UserID: 1446, 1), displaying what could be seen as a sort of ‘giving back’ from users who ascended out of inceldom. A prime and highly-upvoted example of ‘tough love’ was presented from a former incel, who explained:

You’re not incel because you’re (presumably) unattractive. You’re not incel because you’re autistic. You’re incel because you refer to women as “cumguzzling pieces of slutty trash” and because you think rape is a response to not being given sex. Jesus Christ, this subreddit. As a side note, I’m not incel. I’m what you’d call a “normie”. I was incel at one point but thankfully I’m not anymore. If anyone wants to talk I could maybe help you out of your situation. The attitude in this post won’t get you anywhere but perhaps some self-improvement and positive attitudes could! (UserID: 78, 99)

Improvement discourse was frequent, but incels were split in how they responded. While some incels were receptive to normie advice – although not necessarily the suggested methods – there were also many that rejected the notion of improvement due to fatalistic beliefs about the reality of society and women or because they’re simply unable to improve. In some cases, disillusioned incels were hostile, such as this user’s random-set comment: ‘How about you take your advice and shove it up your ass, normie? I’m sure it will go nicely with your butt plug and chastity cage you beta numale cuck’ (UserID: 969, 14). On the other hand, normie commentary and support was, at times, accepted and appeared to serve as a reminder to incels that they are not as isolated or outcasted as they originally thought:

to be fair and honest, most normies usually advice us against suicide. Some fellow incels actually advocate and encourage us to do it. i know when i posted about killing myself i received a lot of comments and pms⁷ from fellow incels who said ‘yeah, that’s the only way out for us.’ normies gave me their usual advice and told me to hold on, which is what i’m doing. regardless, don’t kill yourself. suicide is not the answer. (UserID: 237b, 82)

While incels were not entirely receptive of self-improvement suggestions from outsiders, the dialogue presented within the comments identified factors that incel users saw as preventative to their betterment, such as mental health and biological factors. Many times, mental health and neurodivergent diagnoses were given by incels as reasons for why self-improvement is not a simple solution for inceldom. For example, one user explained in a random-set comment, ‘What level of social skills are you expecting us to develop? If you are advising us to develop social skills in the top 10%, this is unfeasible for most of us. If you are advising us to develop average social skills, that may be possible for some of us, but still difficult for the incels that are on the autism spectrum’ (UserID: 1280, 2). These dismissals of incels’ propensity for change were often found within the random-set rather than the highly-upvoted set, which tended to include more exasperated sentiments. This difference between sample sets indicates that incels’ grappling with their mental health or who may be neurodivergent are not being engaged with on a similar scale as their more controversial peers.

Conflict

Beyond discussions of personal wellbeing and autonomy, philosophical debates and arguments about conflicting worldviews were omnipresent. Some of the largest discrepancies between the random and highly-upvoted sets were found within the prevalence of corrective-statements and conflict. Comparatively, normies efforts to ‘correct’ incels’ worldview or to rebuke incel pseudoscience were extensive within the upvoted set (20.6%) compared to the random set (9.0%). While typically presented in a sarcastic or ‘tough love’ fashion, non-incel posters would attempt to correct incels’ worldview or false misinformation.

One of the greatest topics of contention was that of female anatomy and reproductive health, particularly as it relates to the concept of virginity and female sexuality. For instance, in a thread discussing the correlation between female genitalia appearance and sexual activity, one user wrote in a highly-upvoted comment, ‘Guys, sex literally CANNOT change how a vagina is shaped’ (UserID: 182, 104). In one thread discussing sexual violence, one user’s highly-upvoted comment attempted to dissuade any misconceptions:

Christ. Oxytocin doesn’t get released during a rape. Hormones don’t get released just because the vagina is being penetrated, except probably cortisol, the stress hormone. You know, if you aren’t attractive, then focus on your intelligence. Wildly swinging a profoundly disturbed attempt at scientific thought twisted to justify your insanity is not convincing anyone of your intelligence. (UserID: 98, 421)

Corrective comments were also utilized to emphasize the prevalence of mental health struggles and negative dating experiences in the broader population, writ large. These comments were frequently framed to reject incel ‘excuses’ stemming from their mental health. In a random-set comment, one user explained, ‘Depression can be hormonally-induced. Just because someone is good-looking and successful doesn’t mean their pituitary gland can’t be fucked up. They may be more depressed than you could know’ (UserID: 1318, 12). Comments dismissing mental health as a legitimate barrier were more prevalent in the highly-upvoted sample set. This finding is complimentary to the lack of highly-upvoted incel comments identifying mental health as a barrier for improvement and suggests that mental health is not considered a legitimate reason for inceldom – particularly by non-incels.

Users also attempted to shed light on flawed perspectives and worldviews. For example, users discussed women in college as being inherently sexual and unproductive, to which one user maintained in a highly-upvoted comment, ‘As someone who went to university, none of this happened. We just got drunk at the pub and played pool. No girl aspires to be a “college slut”’ (UserID: 1462, 116). In one instance, a user argued that there is no such thing as a violent incel, to which another responded in a highly-upvoted comment, ‘Elliot Rodger’ (UserID: 112, 76) – the incel responsible for killing 6 and injuring 14 in a series of attacks in 2014 (Nagourney et al. 2014; BBC News 2018). In another highly-upvoted comment, a user questioned, ‘What’s there to admire about a 20 something loser who couldn’t get laid so he killed a load of people?’ (UserID: 207, 77).

The more widespread or omnipresent dynamic between the subreddit users was that of defiance and hostility. Arguments, plain and simple, were by far the most common code within the highly upvoted set (28.6%), while being the third most prominent within the random set (18.6%) behind incel ideological comments and expressed beliefs about women. Accusations of hypocrisy were more frequent in the upvoted set (20.3%) relative to the random set (11.8%), while general insults were more pervasive within the random set (63.4%) compared to the upvoted set (54.5%). In one highly-upvoted comment, a poster attempted to highlight the hypocrisy they saw within the subreddit, particularly within the ‘blackpill’ ideology, and wrote:

My favorite thing is how if someone met someone on here, a large portion of users wouldn’t even be happy for them. He’d immediately become \Chad\” and the woman would be called a whore. I also still have no idea why you want to sleep with women when you despise them. Also, contrary to the popular lunatic belief here, people don’t like being treated like shit. (UserID: 1452, 77)

Users commented on physical appearances, such as the highly-upvoted comment arguing ‘They smelled your lack of showering and detected you post on incels’ (UserID: 490, 132); as well as general intelligence, like the highly-upvoted comment proclaiming, ‘From now on we shall refer to all incels as insane fucking morons’ (UserID: 486, 131). Incels often responded to attacks or attempted corrections with an exclusionary response. In one random-set comment, for example, a user fights back: ‘ … Don’t like the shit on this sub, then don’t come here and get on with your own life. Fucking idiot’ (UserID: 539, 12). The prevalence of arguing and debates was much greater within the highly-upvoted set, with the vast majority of which containing ad hominem attacks and debating conflicting perspectives. This conflict reinforced strong in- and out-group delineations among posters on the subreddit, typically being a dichotomy between normies and incels. A concise representation of this being a random-set comment where a user admonished, ‘Don’t ever call me a fucking normie’ (UserID: 705, 6).

Online deviance and insinuated harm

Deviant comments were more frequent in the random set (11.8%) than the highly-upvoted set (4.6%). Comments containing misogynistic, racist, xenophobic, homo- and transphobic sentiment were evident across both the highly upvoted (34.8%) and random (28.8%) set. In one instance a user exemplified the overlap between incels’ misogyny and racist ideology, writing:

The biggest issue with white men raising Tyrone’s children is that blacks tend to be more faithless and have lower IQs but are using the wealth and social skills of whites to bring up their children in an environment better than any they could have provided. The long run consequences are more lazy and shiftless blacks and fewer productive and loyal whites. (UserID: 139, 0)

When responding to being asked whether he hated women, another user stated, ‘No, it’s just a part of their nature, and biology to be that way. If you want them; you have to remove their rights, but however we live in a progressive society’ (UserID: 692, 81).

Comments that were considered deviant but fell short of violent or offline deviant action were for all intents and purposes identical across the upvoted (39.1%) and random (35.6%) sets. These comments included those that, if said offline, would be considered widely inappropriate and deviant, such as micro-aggressions, minimizing or debunking sexual violence, and promoting the hypothetical suffering of others. As an example, one user stated, ‘He makes a valid point. I for example would gladly be raped for a million dollars. I wonder how many people will want to be depressed, suicidal and socially isolated incel for 10 years for a million dollars. I am pretty sure no one would, which proves the point that incel is worse than rape’ (UserID: 1385, 3). Another user commented, ‘Such disgusting double standards, spot on. It makes me sick to think if I were 3–4 points higher on the attractiveness scale, I could rape and get away with it, hell it would not even be considered rape. Exactly. Fucking chads, can get away with anything. Chad rape is always consensual sex’ (UserID: 1295, 1).

However, there was a notable difference between sets regarding the prevalence of comments alluding to offline harm or deviance. While a considerable portion of the deviant comments within the upvoted set included violent outbursts and potential harm (17.4%), these manifestations of deviance were much more prominent within the random set (28.8%). On numerous instances incels proposed and encouraged online deviant acts. The second most highly-upvoted comment, for example, was a presentation of results from a user’s fake profile experiment on Tinder. The user (UserID: 634, 987) shared a series of screenshots in response to a fake online dating app profile they had created. The end of the user’s fake 23-year-old’s biography stated, ‘I’m on tinder ‘cause maybe if I fuck some of you sluts I’ll stop wanting to be with kids (unlikely lmao, they’re way tighter than your beef curtain cunts). I hope you can therefore forgive me for my past crimes’ (UserID: 634, 987). For incels, women’s responses to the fake profile reaffirmed and validated their worldview, particularly that physical appearance outweighs character. Online trickery is a salient form of deviance within both the highly-upvoted and random set. For instance, one user encourages others to ‘Black pill yourself by posing as a Chad online and hitting on her. Then you’ll see her true nature’ (UserID: 861, 5).

While these schemes are occurring online, users discuss offline consequences that serve as a sort of righteous vindication. For instance, one user implores that the women responding to the fake Tinder profile should be punished for their transgressions: ‘If any of these women are single mothers/mothers, then please report then to the police or some shit. Scum like that shouldn’t be allowed near children’ (UserID: 187, 155). Women writ large are seen as culpable for the plight of incels and thus deserving of righteous retaliation from incel members.

Beyond emotional and psychological warfare, physical violence is also condoned as one user comments ‘Even if that’s a joke, all women who think that way should be executed, hopefully by incels’ (UserID: 1295, 3). This sentiment was echoed by another user who proclaimed, ‘i hate greek girls with all my heart. they deprived me of sex and alienated me. fuck them and their stupid bf standards. they deserve to be beaten to death’ (UserID: 237e, −1). In addition to fantasizing about violent retribution, users also posted comments about deviant offline actions they have taken that they see as being aligned with incel ideology:

I prioritize single male hires. I get away with it as my department is easily outperforming every other because shockingly I make sure to hire guys with qualifications relevant to the job, which I pointed out once HR asked me about our lack of diversity. Boss shit down their neck for that one lmao dude knows not to fuck around with a working formula. (UserID: 1338, 0)

Despite their primarily online presence, the perspectives formed within online spaces are thus being utilized to fantasize – if not encourage – offline retribution.

Due to the public nature of the subreddit, non-incel observers were able to interject and shame deviant comments and actions that incels confessed to online. These comments were not as extensive compared to the other thematic codes. Of note, however, is that the proportion of deviance-shaming comments was greater in the highly upvoted set (7.4%) than in the random set (1.6%). One user reacted to an incel comment explaining, ‘So, she left, and you *followed* her? Dude. EDIT: I’m not saying you were a threat to her, but look at it from her perspective, a stranger just started talking to her, and when she politely left the location, he followed her. That could be viewed as very threatening to a woman’ (UserID: 3, 85).

Other users shamed incel deviance as simply poor or unacceptable behavior. For instance, one user explains ‘I can’t honestly debate with someone who can find any justification for stalking and sexually threatening another person solely based on the fact that they (rightfully) address you in a disturbing and disgusted manner. There’d be no point because it wouldn’t get through to someone lacking in morals and basic human decency’ (UserID: 495, 192). Similarly, another user asks ‘You’re happy a woman killed herself? What goes on in your sick mind? Usually, I try to be polite to the people on this sub, but you’re sick’ (UserID: 182, 113). Interestingly, former incels frequented the subforum as resources for those needing support or as legitimate voices of understanding the incel plight. In one example, a former incel writes:

there are pro pedo posts here done by people who subscribe to this very sub. there are posts that talk about wanting a virgin young girl around 14 years old. these are posts done by grown ass man who also think rape doesn’t harm women. these are posts in your sub and you don’t ban these people, you just let them be. of course you’re hated as well as this sub. You’re just watching all these disgusting people posting disgusting things and you’re banning the normies and the women instead. look, i used to be an incel, i made friends here, there are some good people here who don’t believe in those disgusting things. but this sub turned into a major hate fest that has nothing to do with being an incel. (UserID: 237d, 92)

In many instances, the input from outsiders appears to shame the tolerance of deviant behaviors from less extreme members. There were a small number of comments (i.e., less than five across all coded deviance comments) that were potentially authored by non-incels, which were framed as giving incels a taste of their own medicine. The discrepancy in comments that shamed deviance suggest that there may either be more non-incels engaged in the upvoted content or that incels in public forums are less likely to support outwardly deviant or violent actions.

Discussion

This study sought to explore the online subculture of incels by examining the content of comments made to a now-shuttered incel subreddit on the Reddit communications platform. A sample of both highly upvoted comments and randomly selected comments were used to assess the spectrum of discussion among users. The findings provide useful insights into the nature of both the incel subculture, radicalization to extremist beliefs, and our understanding of online communities generally.

First, this study demonstrated that incel perspectives and worldview were shared in the form of a blackpill doctrine, which was part of a broader ideology of grievance against men and women. Such comments, particularly those against women, were more prevalent in the random set, as were comments that were personal and emotional in nature. These dynamics are similar to that of other online subcultures (Bowman-Grieve 2009; Holt et al., 2010), wherein users are encouraged to engage with one another on a personal level. Furthermore, this study mirrors prior work on incel communities which find participants are more likely to use personal pronouns in their comments (Jaki et al. 2019).

The arguments and debates between posters across the samples also reflect broader dynamics observed in studies of online subcultures (e.g., Blevins & Holt 2010, 2007). Individuals within the subculture debated the meaning of concepts like being blackpilled, ‘true’ inceldom, and the value of violent actions, suggesting there were differences in the experiences of subcultural participants. The use of terms like ‘normie’ also served to identify those who existed outside of the subculture’s boundaries, similar to other subcultures (Blevins & Holt 2010, 2010). Recognizing the different experiences of those within the subculture and the presence of out-groups is essential to the enculturation process of being an incel (Holt 2007; O’Malley, et al., 2020).

Ideological conflict was the most prevalent theme within the upvoted set, as opposed to being the third most prevalent among comments in the random set. Across both sets, over half of these comments were ad hominem arguments reliant on insults. The upvoted set included a greater number of comments identifying hypocrisy but users were still more likely to resort to insults. It should be noted that comments involving incels making life-altering changes were commonly found in the highly-upvoted comments. There were mixed reactions to comments promoting change, with some users responding positively while others, especially those blackpill adherents were negative. Corrective comments were overwhelmingly sourced from users who appeared to be non-incel, and were much more frequent within the highly-upvoted set. As a result, this sort of engagement created a potential mechanism to counter violent extremism rhetoric within the subreddit. Corrective comments may have served as means to dissuade users, particularly new incel users, from adopting incel values and behaviors.

The discriminatory and prejudicial statements prevalent across both sets reflect prior research on the views of incels generally (Daly and Reed 2022; Liggett et al., 2020). This may speak to the salience of misogyny and racism in society, which were the most frequent type of discriminatory comments, followed by anti-trans and homophobic comments. A lack of opposition (i.e., downvoting) may also indicate that comments alluding to action or harm accrued stronger reactions and thus greater oppositional engagement. In short, users may have directed their focus to the most controversial comments.

While infrequent, comments including violent outbursts or alluding to offline harm were more likely to be found within the random set. It is more likely that non-incel users were quick to downvote these comments, which may have helped provide an important counter-narrative to violent ideas. At the same time, the importance of shared experiences and personal grievances among incels demonstrated the importance of offline personal experiences and interactions in the formation and acceptance of online subcultural norms and values (see Daly and Reed 2022; Holt 2020). Their shared experiences reinforced the value of the online community in their lives, and their potential commitment to this subculture. The adversarial relationships to outgroups and acknowledgement of violent narratives may have also reaffirmed individuals’ identification as incel and contributed to the overall process of radicalization toward violence (Bowman-Grieve 2009; Holt, Freilich, and Chermak 2017).

Since the majority of incels appeared to be nonviolent, the lack of tolerance for actual violence may be reflected in the lack of positive engagement with the most harmful deviance comments. In some respects, this mirrors what is known about involvement in various ideological movements – a very small proportion of adherents engage in violent actions in support of their beliefs (see also Holt, Freilich, and Chermak 2017). The nonviolent nature of most incels did not prevent the justification of deviant and criminal behaviors, as well as rampant misogyny and other forms of discrimination in the subreddit. Thus, online communities, such as the former incel subreddit, could foster the enculturation of users into deviant subcultures (Adams and Roscigno 2005; Bowman-Grieve 2009; Goldsmith and Brewer 2015) or migration to more extremist subcultures (Mamié, Horta Ribeiro, and West 2021), such as those found in incel-dedicated third party sites (Ribeiro et al. 2020, 2020a).

As one element of the broader incel subculture, the r/Incels subreddit was heavily exposed to conflicting mainstream values from who appear to be non-incel ‘lurkers.’ Compared to other subreddits, incels may have been particularly interesting to onlookers of all backgrounds due to recent, widely known attacks by incels (Chang 2020). Many topics discussed by incels, notably those that lend themselves to rape culture, women’s bodily autonomy, and intimate relationships, are also prominent in mainstream conversations (Ging 2019; Jaki et al. 2019; Jane 2014). The sensationalized topics coupled with incels extreme opinions may have culminated into an online space where mainstream observers clashed with the extreme incel subculture.

The implications of this study for our understanding of incel subculture should be conditioned by several key factors. First and foremost, since online communities are everchanging as evidenced by the banned subreddit and user-base migration. As such, researchers must be cautious when interpretating results and discussing the incel subculture writ large. The user dynamics within the r/Incels subreddit identified themes that may not be applicable or present in the same way across incel platforms (Bratich and Banet-Weiser 2019; Farrell et al. 2019; Liggett et al., 2020; Ribeiro et al. 2020a, 2020b), in part due to inconsistent regulations (Conway 2017, 2020). The unit of measurement were individual comments, meaning that each comment was presented without the context of the entire thread. While we were able to navigate this by only coding comments based on their content, there is much to be gained from analyzing comments within the context of interacting with those of other users. In the latter scenario, researchers can observe users actively making meaning of the incel ideology and blackpill doctrine (O’Malley, K. Holt, and T. Holt 2021), as well as ways in which subcultural argot contributes to forming a collective identity among users. Addressing the context of ongoing discussions may support researchers’ efforts to better identify characteristics associated with a range of incel perspectives, such as the various ‘pill’ ideologies.

An additional limitation of this study is that we are unable to determine the level of engagement with ideological content among those users who either lurk or no longer interact with comments online (i.e., posting, up- or downvoting, etc.). These individuals may have observed the content, which may contribute to a self-radicalization process despite a lack of interaction with other users (see Hamm and Spaaij 2017; Holt, Freilich, and Chermak 2017). Similarly, we are unable to account for offline influences that may facilitate an individual’s likelihood of accept the normative order of incel subculture (see Holt 2007).

Future research on incel communities could also benefit from an examination of the ways in which their discussions are influenced by broad social movements, such as #MeToo. As these online phenomena shape public discourse, it is likely they also affect the communication patterns of online subcultures like that of incels. Such endeavors may include consideration into how broader societal paradigms surrounding women may influence users vulnerable to extremist anti-woman doctrine in online spaces, or investigation into incel narratives of women as an extension of preexisting and long-standing patriarchal ideologies normalized within mainstream culture. For instance, the impact of the #MeToo movement on the language of incels may be informative, particularly for those experiencing masculinity strain, to help determine mechanisms that can be employed to dissuade enculturation (Daly and Reed 2022). The results displayed a similar prevalence of comments critiquing women and women’s status in society, at times being highly misogynistic in nature. This finding speaks to what scholars have considered a shortcoming of contemporary research into incels, that being the overemphasis of incel dialogue as idiosyncratic rather than an extension of mainstream, patriarchal values (Chang 2020). This overlap with the patriarchal discourse normalized in mainstream culture may provide a sort of ‘slippery slope’ (McCauley and Moskalenko 2011) for users exposed to incel doctrine in publicly accessible online sites and forums.

Further research considering how incels engage with collective identity formation may be beneficial, as publicly accessible, introductory spaces may not serve the purpose in a straight-forward way. For instance, more veteran users within the r/Incels subreddit may have felt a greater sense of comradery in opposition to an adversary group (i.e., non-incel engagement and opposition), but the opposite may have been true for newer users. Developing an understanding of the characteristics that make users vulnerable to inceldom is important but finding indicators of which users continue to engage with inceldom after being exposed online to alternative values and perspectives is a worthwhile endeavor.

Another point of consideration may be that subreddit members, as opposed to incel-dedicated third party sites, may have distinct characteristics that have led them to maintain a presence. In other words, the most veteran users in the r/Incels subreddit may not have been the most extreme or may have enjoyed the dialogue with perceived-adversaries and vulnerable users. Other users who held more extreme viewpoints may have disagreed with the lack on insular discussion and regulation, and subsequently migrated to third-party sites with less regulations and oversight.

In conclusion, themes that lend themselves to more radical incel sentiment (i.e., incel ideology, harmful deviance, etc.) were more frequent in the random set while those challenging incel radicalization (e.g., support, corrective comments, shaming deviance, etc.) were more prominent in the upvoted set. Collectively, the prevalence of non-incel engagement within the subreddit may have contributed to some incels conceptualization of normies as an adversary group, particularly among more veteran or extreme users. Overall, this begs the question of how these mechanisms have driven user migration to sites that, in addition to being more extreme, are more privatized and dedicated to incel-ideology. Additionally, it is essential to understand whether the clash of incel subculture and mainstream opposition was just as important in redirecting some users who were swayed by ‘normie’ support and encouragement.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Brenna Helm

Brenna Helm is a doctoral student in the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. Her research focuses on terrorists’ and extremists’ use of the Internet, male supremacist movements, right-wing extremism, and the progression of hate and extremist beliefs on- and offline.

Ryan Scrivens

Ryan Scrivens is an Assistant Professor in the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. He is also an Associate Director at the International CyberCrime Research Centre at Simon Fraser University and a Research Fellow at the VOX-Pol Network of Excellence. He conducts problem-oriented interdisciplinary research with a focus on terrorists’ and extremists’ use of the Internet, right-wing terrorism and extremism, and hate crime.

Thomas J. Holt

Thomas J. Holt is a Professor in the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. His research focuses on cybercrime, cyberterrorism, and the role of technology in the furtherance of all manner of deviance.

Steve Chermak

Steven Chermak is a Professor of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. Dr. Chermak's research on rare events focuses on activities in the area of school shootings, terrorism, and mass shootings. This research includes the development of four databases using open source materials. Chermak’s research has been published in Justice Quarterly, Crime & Delinquency, and Terrorism and Political Violence.

Richard Frank

Richard Frank is an Associate Professor in the School of Criminology at Simon Fraser University (SFU), Canada and Director of the International CyberCrime Research Centre. Richard completed a PhD in Computing Science (2010) and another PhD in Criminology (2013) at SFU. He is the creator of The Dark Crawler, a tool for collecting and analyzing data from the open Internet, dark web, and online discussion forums.

Notes

1. ‘NEET’ is an incel acronym for someone ‘Not in Education, Employment, or Training’ (Incel Wiki 2021).

2. Randomly generated Author ID, followed by the comment’s score-value.

3. An incel term for someone with Aspergers, also common referred to as ‘aspie’ (Incel Wiki 2021).

4. An incel term for adopting a false belief in order to cope with the emotional pain of reality. (Incel Wiki 2021).

5. Shorthand for ‘I know the feeling’.

6. Shorthand for ‘in real life’.

7. Shorthand for ‘private messages’.