Meander Into the Manosphere

Clawing for meaning gets people scratched

by Tristan Darvin


Internet star and former kickboxer Andrew Tate.

“What colour is your Bugatti?”

That was a rhetorical question said by Andrew Tate. Rhetorical questions such as this one serve as jabs at the logic or moral fiber of an opponent. With the question of money and cars being used as a moral criticism, the question is based on the idea that money is morality and greed is good. In being based on such an idea, it brings a lot of questions about those who are asking it.

What created this void of meaning that’s been filled by this nasty materialism, who is this void in, and how is it better filled?

To take a look at the father of the aforementioned rhetorical question to get some insight, the phrase was coined by internet celebrity, kickboxer, self described misogynist, and likely human trafficker Andrew Tate. Tate was raised on an estate in Luton, England by his chessmaster father and his catering assistant mother, with Tate gaining television and kickboxing fame; Tate’s fame was short-lived due to a leaked video of him beating a woman with a belt. But Tate clawed out of his exile as the rising star of the online ‘Manosphere’.

An online coalition of disenfranchised men known as the ‘Manosphere’ has raised a myriad of pro-male figures into stardom from Andrew Tate to Jordan Peterson. The members of this coalition dwell in their own world, rejected by all else, that even has its own slang and lingo. These men often cite unfair rejection and mistreatment from others, especially women, for their behavior of sexual harassment and sexism. Whether or not those complaints are valid or a strawman is debatable.

The manosphere often leaves the internet to affect the material world. Elliot Roger, killer of six and self-described “supreme gentleman”, subscribed to these defeatist ideas of loneliness and despair and used them to justify his rampage. However, his behavior as described by himself and others had shown him not as a lonely soul, but one who drives others away while blaming them for leaving him behind. This demonstrates not the state of victimhood these men describe, but a state of hostile misogyny that makes everyone miserable and these men hateful.

However, with all of this in mind, one thing escapes us: how do we solve this?

Andrew Tate, just like the entire subculture he dwells in, spreads via shocking and rule breaking content. They take hold on the minds of men via scandal and unleashing repressed desires. They take hold, but they can be shaken off. We can be better, but we have to do some things.

Just like romance, communication is key in deradicalization. By unsealing the lid on these emotions by normalizing conversations about loneliness as opposed to ‘tolerating masculine solitude’ we may give these feelings an escape valve that isn’t as dangerous as when they come bursting out directed by muscled misogynists. Just as one can be pulled in, one can be pulled out by openness and acceptance of the other. And thus, the other may cease to be so terrifying and the hate may be quelled in the end.