Author: Amy Stinton

The manner in which a political incident is presented affects how it is perceived, and thus influences how the public and politicians engage with the issue. With 50 people being killed between 2014 and 2018 due to extremist incel violence, comparable to the approximately 72 deaths resulting from Islamic extremists, many argue that the rise of extremist misogynist violence should be understood as terrorist action, and similar security tactics should be used to tackle the phenomenon. However, due to the way incel violence is presented and perceived, there has been a clear lack of policy responses that address this trend of violence as a threat to public security; raising questions about how policymakers, and society as a whole, should address incel ideology.

Incels, an abbreviation of “involuntary celibates”, subscribe to an ideology that blames feminism and political correctness for their misfortune; proclaiming men must fight back in order to protect their existence. The rise of online incel communities mirrors trends in growing extreme right ideology, primarily amongst white, working-class, young men. The rapid social and economic change seen over the past 35 years has resulted in a change of cultural norms, leading to certain groups feeling their perceived societal status has become threatened. The rise of extremist misogyny, as seen with the incel community, can thus be attributed to the increased mobilization of women and other minority groups, as these men feel cheated out of positions that were previously promised to them.

Discomfort with their perceived position in society results in growing feelings of anger and nostalgia. These feelings of isolation and victimhood, seen as motivators for incel related violence, result in males seeking validation and comfort online. The internet provides a favorable landscape for the incel community, as online anonymity allows males to share their true thoughts without public vilification, and users can migrate quickly between different sites if they are taken down. Online forums also foster feelings of in-group satisfaction, as their feelings are reflected and validated by others. These communities are also shown to create a permissive environment for violent actors, as males who follow the incel ideology are more likely to condone political violence.

With the manifesto of Elliot Rodger’s, an incel who murdered six people in 2014, outlining incel ideology as the motivation for their attack, many argue incel violence should be understood as a method of political behavior – incels are attempting to affect government action by drawing societal attention to their ideology by means of public violence. Rodger’s use of the phrase “incel rebellion” further highlights the way in which violence is understood by the incels as a form of collective action. Despite this, portrayals in policy and media repeatedly illustrate incel violence as a private and individualist issue; highlighting the acts as  “one off incidents”, and focusing on personal motivations instead of the wider ideological framework in which incels belong. Subsequently, elites and masses do not see incels, or broader extremist misogyny, as a public threat, as they do not have the thematic framing of violence as a collective issue.

This has damaging implications when attempting to implement effective policy solutions, because if policy makers do not see incels as a threat, they will not treat them as one. To overcome this, some argue that incel violence should be placed within the wider context of misogyny and white supremacy; arguing that incel violence is not a unique form of gender based violence, and thus the issue as a whole should be considered as a public threat. However this is disputed, with others arguing that by positioning incel violence within other gender based violence, debates will be derailed by the same biased perceptions – that gender based violence is a private and not political issue. Therefore, highlighting incels specifically as a security issue is the only adequate way to address the threat, as it bypasses these unproductive debates.

Despite their differences in positioning incels within a security context, both arguments agree that the cause of the issue lies within society’s misogynist framework. Therefore, proposing solutions that only aim to reduce online access to incel media, such as increased surveillance and measures from digital media sites, are inadequate, as they do not fully address the narratives that cause men to turn to extremist misogyny. To stop the radicalisation of young men into incel communities, and suitably  affirm incel and gender based violence as a public threat, culture and institutions must further endeavor to change the norms by which society understands gender.

Educational programmes, both at a young age and in wider society, can thus be understood as the key solution to extremist misogynistic violence, as they directly intervene in the development of incel ideology and deconstruct societal norms. For young people, educational schemes that discuss gender constructs, privilege and consent should be further improved and solidified within school curricular. In a wider context, schemes that focus on educating political figures, law enforcement and media on the dangers of extremist violence as a public threat will help narratives around gender to shift. Furthermore, subsequent dismissals of extremist misogyny must also be highlighted as public threats, as they reinforce harmful misogynist frameworks.

However, for these solutions to work effectively, it is imperative that they address backfire effects. Current educational programmes highlight gender norms as the cause of inequality, but they fail to implement the important further measures which aid young men in processing complex emotions relating to gender. As the rise of extremist misogyny is correlated with a rise of new cultural attitudes around gender, conversations attempting to deconstruct societal misogyny risk further perpetuating discomforting emotions of isolation and anger – the emotions which cause young men to seek out incel communities. Therefore, in order to successfully reduce threats of incel violence and ideology, further research must focus on solutions which directly address psychology and backfire effects; allowing for discomforting emotions to be translated into critical self-reflection, and subsequent societal change.