Nation of Men: Diagnosing Manospheric Misogyny as Virulent Online Nationalism

NOTE

NATION OF MEN: DIAGNOSING MANOSPHERIC MISOGYNY

AS VIRULENT ONLINE NATIONALISM

RACHEL GUY*

I. INTRODUCTION......................................... 602

II. DEFINING MANOSPHERIC MISOGYNY........................... 603

A. THE MANOSPHERE ................................... 603

B. ENACTING STRUCTURAL SEXISM THROUGH MANOSPHERIC MISOGYNY 606

III. MANOSPHERIC MISOGYNY AS NATIONALISM................... 610

A. A REGRESSIVE CULTURAL NATIONALISM ................... 611

B. AN IMAGINED COMMUNITY IN ANTI-FEMINISM................ 614

1. Oppositional Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 615

2. Grievance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 616

3. Recruitment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 618

C. BEYOND PRINT CAPITALISM............................. 619

IV. CONSEQUENCES OF ONLINE NATIONALISM .................... 621

A. ADVANTAGES OF AN INTERNET-NATIVE NATIONALISM .......... 622

B. SURROGATE NATIONALISM IN THE DIGITAL AGE............... 624

C. VIOLENT IMPLICATIONS OF MANOSPHERIC MISOGYNY AS A NATION-

IN-WAITING........................................ 625

D. LEGAL RESPONSES TO THE THREAT OF MANOSPHERIC MISOGYNY. . . 631

1. Recognizing the Motivations of the Manosphere’s

Extreme Violence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 631

a. Misogynistic Hate Crimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 631

b. Misogynistic Terrorism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 634

2. Providing Adequate Responses to all Misogyny-Based

Harms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 636

3. Combatting the Online Greenhouse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 637

V. CONCLUSION .......................................... 639

*Georgetown University Law Center, J.D., 2021. I am endlessly grateful to Professor Naomi Mezey

whose teaching and guidance were instrumental to the formulation of this Note, and to the many friends and

colleagues who provided insightful feedback. I would also like to thank the Georgetown Journal of Gender

& the Law editors and staff, who I have had the honor to work alongside for the past two years. Special

thanks to Professor Zina Makar for teaching me everything I know about lawyering. © 2021, Rachel Guy.

601

I. INTRODUCTION

In March of 2021, 21-year-old white male terrorist, Robert Aaron Long, tar-

geted three Asian spas in the Atlanta area.

1

He killed eight people, six of whom

were Asian women.

2

When apprehended on his way to Florida to continue kill-

ing, Long told police that he targeted the spas because they were a sexual “temp-

tation . . . that he wanted to eliminate.”

3

We do not yet know much about the terrorist’s ideologies or communities

beyond this statement. Off‌icially, his motive is still under investigation.

4

But, we

already know what matters: he came to conceptualize Asian women as a sexual

temptation—one he felt empowered to eliminate. We do not need to ask exactly

where he developed such abhorrent bigotry, because we know where it comes

from. It comes from the internet. Or rather, it comes from a culture deeply steeped

in sexism and misogyny, which protects the roots of unjust and oppressive sys-

tems and simply sweeps the most virulent forms of hate online.

The internet has always been a place for the most outrageous and dangerous

ideologies to thrive. In the last few years though, the hate that has long been fes-

tering on the internet is increasingly boiling over into “real life.” Targets of online

hate face real consequences and emotional harm both online and off, and messen-

gers of online hate are beginning to hold consequential political power.

5

One of

the internet’s most potent breeding grounds for toxic content is a loose network

of sites, forums, and online groups known to sociologists, journalists, and itself as

the “manosphere.”

6

The manosphere is so named because of its focus on men’s

rights, men’s sexual desires, and bolstering a patriarchal world order around the

ideal masculine identities, which capture the attention of its denizens. It is this

last concern that is the subject of this Note.

Out of the manosphere, a uniquely vitriolic misogyny has emerged among

groups united by a disdain for gender liberalization and the increasing equality of

women in Western cultures. This Note argues that built around the existing hier-

archies of structural sexism, and with anti-feminism as its rallying cry, the

1. Amir Vera & Jason Hanna, Here’s What We Know About the Atlanta Spa Shootings That Left 8

Dead, CNN (Mar. 19, 2020, 10:15 AM), https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/16/us/metro-atlanta-spa-

shootings-what-we-know/index.html.

2. See David Futrelle, Robert Aaron Long Apparently Thought He Was the Victim of His Own Desire.

He’s Not Alone, WASH. POST (Mar. 18, 2021, 3:46 PM), https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/

2021/03/18/robert-aaron-long-apparently-thought-he-was-victim-his-own-desire-hes-not-alone/; Vera

& Hanna, supra note 1. The victim’s names were Delaina Ashley Yaun, Paul Andre Michels, Xiaojie

Tan, Daoyou Feng, Soon C. Park, Hyun J. Grant, Suncha Kim, and Yong A. Yue. Futrelle, supra. I

would prefer not to name the many attackers identif‌ied in this Note, but names are included to streamline

the discussion (because there are many “white male terrorists’”) and because, in some places, they are

necessary for a full understanding of the topic.

3. Futrelle, supra note 2.

4. Vera & Hanna, supra note 1.

5. See infra Section IV.C.

6. See Debbie Ging, Alphas, Betas, and Incels: Theorizing the Masculinities of the Manosphere, 22

MEN & MASCULINITIES 638, 638–39 (Oct. 2019).

602 THE GEORGETOWN JOURNAL OF GENDER AND THE LAW [Vol. XXII:601

manosphere’s misogyny has crystallized into a dangerous online nationalism. As

a nationalism, the ideology and its fervent adherents wield a potent form of col-

lective power. While they slowly and disjointedly reach for political power, their

cultural power is undeniable—the manosphere draws new men into toxic

misogyny and racism every day and subjects women and other targets to barrages

of hate and violence. Most signif‌icantly, they have shown a proclivity for

terrorism.

Part II of this Note def‌ines the manosphere and its relationship to structural sex-

ism. Applying classic theories of nationalism, Part III argues that manospheric

misogyny is a fully developed cultural nationalism, utilizing the communication

powers of the internet to unite an imagined community in grievance. Finally, Part

IV examines the capabilities available to manospheric misogyny as an internet-

native nationalism. Employing Thomas Hylland Eriksen’s frameworks for online

nationalisms, this Note argues that manospheric misogyny should be understood as

a dangerous nation-in-waiting that will employ increasing levels of on- and off-line

violence in pursuit of a politic that embodies its extreme, misogynist ideal. In light

of the epidemic of violence growing out of the manosphere—of which Long is only

the latest chapter—this Note brief‌ly addresses three categories of legal reform

needed to effectively combat the manosphere and provide redress to its victims. The

uniting theme of these solutions is simply to recognize misogyny as a form of hate

that requires serious legal responses and societal acknowledgment.

The tragic story of the terrorism perpetrated in Atlanta demonstrates the imper-

ative of this Note: we could have seen this violence coming, and until the legal

f‌ield responds, we can only expect the violence to continue.

II. DEFINING MANOSPHERIC MISOGYNY

A. THE MANOSPHERE

The concept of an online “manosphere” was f‌irst coined in 2009 to describe

the existing “network of men’s interest communities” online.

7

Across platforms

such as Facebook, Reddit, 4chan, and others, groups of men with seemingly dis-

parate ideologies—from Traditional Christian Conservatives to Involuntary

Celibates and the alt-right

8

—lament societal and interpersonal grievances.

9

The

content is a mix of self-help, conspiracy theories, and increasingly extremist

indoctrination traded through manifestos, memes, and insults.

10

The term was quickly adopted by the media and the men themselves.

11

With

the name came the increased power of a united identity: the manosphere has since

7. Id. at 639.

8. See id. at 641, 645.

9. See id. at 640.

10. See Helen Lewis, To Learn About the Far Right, Start with the ‘Manosphere’, ATLANTIC (Aug. 7,

2019), https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/08/anti-feminism-gateway-far-right/

595642/.

11. See Ging, supra note 6, at 639.

2021] NATION OF MEN 603