8 Comments

Good and important distinction here, Josh.

To add to Katherine's comment and get more memetically granular: the PUAs (Ross Jeffries, David DeAngelo, Mystery, and RSD Tyler, in that chronological order) predate the original manosphere, which arose during Obama’s first term. The PUAs were “AFCs” (average frustrated chumps) who learned “game” (becoming more attractive to women) through techniques, mindsets, and approaches (in clubs and streets). The manosphere consisted of the three R’s: Roosh, Rollo, and Roissy (then Heartiste). The manosphere evolved from PUAs, advocating masculine self-help (lifting, no fap, etc.) and proposing political and theoretical reasons for asymmetries in the “sexual marketplace” (aka explanations for why they were losing in it). Andrew Tate is about 10 years behind these guys and is basically the “final product” of that lineage.

Other "memetic tribes" were running parallel to the original manosphere: MRAs, MGTOWs, incels, etc. They were not a unified camp and often criticized each other. I’d say the throughline between them all is that, at their core, they agreed theoretically on the problem of them losing in the sexual marketplace but differed on the solution. Another throughline, however, is that they all existed on a spectrum of resentment to hatred toward women.

Like you say, the Zynternet is a different beast. Classic bros—“naturals” in PUA language (i.e., naturally good with women), indifferent to politics, and open to both right and leftist ideas—like Joe Rogan. They lack the theoretical aspect of the manosphere’s meme-tribe constellation but also lack the resentment and hatred as a central aspect of their vibe. If the media conflates these two groups, they’ll just end up hating the media and the political establishment they believe is influencing it ("the left"). This will also encourage the two groups to collide and cross-pollinate, which is already happening.

I do think there is a throughline between the manosphere and the Zynternet, which is:

A) An emotional (and spiritual) longing for brotherhood (often unfulfilled).

B) A focus on having their best interests in mind or at heart, either theoretically or intuitively, while having zero interest in virtue signaling as a “Good Person” for other demographics.

If one cannot offer A or B to Bro Populists (or what I am calling Bropolitics), they will lose this group.

Expand full comment

I think we’re probably finally ready for more granular differentiation - I’d go a step further and say the manosphere isn’t even really the far right either - but ppl who made the necessary distinctions you’re making here were branded as fascists… the all one thing frame forces strange bedfellows together. I think it’s a deliberate move. I dunno. I am hopeful you can make headway & from what I heard about it (haven’t read it yet) black pill was good on this front too, but it’s rough out there for people who want to untangle the web of subcultures that make up the very diverse online right and its adjacent spheres

Expand full comment

We still have so far to go towards a mainstream understanding of any of these online groups. I feel uncertain about whether mainstream media will be able to correct the narrative or just dissolve before that can even happen

Expand full comment

This is the biggest issue the democrat party faces and the least likely to be favorably addressed for them. They operate as a cult and therefore do not tolerate any difference of opinion on several highly polarizing issues. Even exposure to the wrong media will get you excommunicated and slandered. The problem is that without those issues at this point there is no democrat party to speak of, other than the expansion and total triumph of leviathan over the individual. So their power and cohesion as a group is based on woke idiocy which also happens to be hemorrhaging believers.

So yeah not surprising that the only non-woke proposals from the Dems were lifted straight from Trump. The damage is done now for me and just about everyone I know who isn’t a totally compromised wokebot. The conversation will go something like this: “hey first-time Trump voter, come back to the Dems, we’ve listened and understand that we need to refocus on the middle class. Please come back.” To which I’ll say “fuck you, you called me a Nazi and tried to break apart my family, I’m never coming back as long as any of you are still there.”

This is the problem with slandering people of principle. First you pushed us to agree to ridiculous, counterproductive ideas in order to stay in favor. Then when we pushed back you lumped us in with the far right, another group of total fucking morons. Then once we were far right you persecuted us. News flash: you’re the bad guys. You’re the fascists. You’re the censors. Fuck you forever.

Expand full comment

Years ago, I used to casually refer to people as "alt-right" if I found them mildly annoying in their "PC is going too far" cultural critiques. I was horrified to figure out that "alt-right" actually has a much more specific meaning -- as in, actual hate groups. But tons of people were using the word like the first example -- either inadvertently like myself, or purposeful poisoning the well and guilt by association.

Yet the political operatives who deliberately manipulate language like this, are the same people who accuse *others* of misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda.

Expand full comment

Hi Joshua,

Thank you for writing this piece. Your exploration of the distinctions between the Manosphere and the Zynternet is incredibly thought-provoking. While I appreciate the nuanced perspective you've introduced, I'd like to offer some additional insights from my research.

I've conducted virtual ethnographic work on the Black Manosphere, and my findings suggest a more complex interplay between these digital spaces than might be immediately apparent. What I've observed is a fascinating liminal space where these online communities share surprisingly similar dynamics, particularly around constructions of masculinity.

In the Black Manosphere, I found these digital spaces functioned as more than just discussion forums. They operated as platforms for comprehensive self-improvement—focusing on fitness, financial growth, dating strategies, personal style, and self-presentation. Fundamentally, these spaces were deeply invested in performing and achieving a particular vision of hegemonic masculinity.

The content creators in these spaces—now perhaps more accurately termed influencers—positioned themselves as idealized masculine archetypes. This mirrors what you've observed in the Zynternet: charismatic figures that audiences (predominantly men) aspire to emulate. There's a powerful performative aspect to masculinity being negotiated in these digital landscapes.

For this reason, I'm hesitant to completely separate these digital ecosystems. While your introduction of these conceptual distinctions is invaluable, I see significant overlap in how masculine identity is constructed, performed, and celebrated.

I'd be genuinely curious to hear your thoughts on these observations. If you're interested, I'm happy to share my peer-reviewed research on the Black Manosphere for further context.

Looking forward to continuing this fascinating dialogue.

https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3678884.3681873

Expand full comment

You jump-scared me that day during my morning news.

P.s. Love the eye patch, Mr. Citarella.

Expand full comment

BroPop

Expand full comment