‘Masculinism’ is uniting the US right – what is it?

A new movement, “masculinism”, is uniting the right behind extreme anti-feminist views, chiefly in the United States. It promotes the dominant role of men in society, including the idea that men should dominate women.

The movement is led by figures such as self-declared misogynist Andrew Tate (named by the New Yorker as a “singularly influential proponent of masculinism”), who has just been arrested in the US, with his brother Tristan. UK authorities have just announced new charges against the brothers related to allegations of rape and sex trafficking – adding to previous charges in the United Kingdom, and a criminal investigation underway in Romania.

Other masculinists include male supremacist podcaster Myron Gaines, white supremacist influencer Nick Fuentes and preacher Doug Wilson, leader of a network of 170 churches whose followers include US war secretary Pete Hegseth.

The term “masculinist” was originally coined in the late 1800s or early 1900s to refer to defenders of male domination. It was then adopted by some in the men’s rights movement in the 1980s as part of a reaction against second-wave feminism. Now, it is being widely used by manosphere and far-right figures and groups.

Masculinism is an extreme form of a men’s rights movement, which believes men should have more rights, power and opportunities than women.

Extreme ideas becoming more common

Andrew Tate has lived out these ideals in life – building an “empire of abuse” based on systemically exploiting women (whom he called “assets” he could “monetize”) for his webcam business.

Wilson was a guest pastor at the Pentagon’s monthly Christian prayer service in February, with Hegseth praying alongside him. He would like to remove women’s right to vote, and has said: “Men are created to exercise dominion over the earth; they are fitted to be husbandman.” And:

the sexual act cannot be made into an egalitarian pleasuring party. A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts.

These extreme ideas are becoming more common among leading figures within the US right.

“Far from being a fringe belief system, masculinism has become the single most important force uniting the American right, bringing together an unlikely constellation of pastors, posters, senators, preachers, influencers, podcasters, and fanboys,” argued feminist journalist Helen Lewis in a popular Atlantic article.

While right-wing leaders may disagree on Israel, or the role of big tech, they are united in their belief that feminism has destroyed the world, she says.

Though these ideas are also evident in Australia, they are so far confined to the fringes. Far-right commentary website XYZ, for example, whose editor-in-chief David Hiscox once said his goal was “redpilling white men about race” to advocate for the establishment of a “white” ethno-state, includes articles titled “Women’s and girl’s sports need to be banned”, “The woman problem” and “The decay of man”, all promoting masculinist sentiments.

At the same time, a recent study showed 25–30% of Australian boys aged 13–17 agreed with misogynistic attitudes, with 28% supporting “violence to resist feminism”. This mirrors a growing global sentiment that “feminism has gone too far” or that men are now discriminated against.

Extreme men’s rights

A core tenet of feminism has been to argue against simplistic gender roles, stating women can be leaders and men can be carers. Modern masculinist movements are a backlash against these arguments. They argue feminism has undermined the inherent differences between men and women, creating an imbalance that has destroyed modern society.

Masculinists focus in particular on the role of women in the public sphere, arguing women are too irrational and emotional to be involved in politics.

Initial versions argued feminism had gone “too far” and that men’s issues were being ignored. While men’s rights movements had an underlying current of belief in male dominance, they often – at least officially – claimed they were only about achieving equality.

Today’s masculinist movements officially remove the mask. They argue not just that men’s issues have been ignored, but that we need to return to a world of full male dominance.

They argue we should strip women’s right to vote, that women should return to a “traditional” life as homemakers, and that husbands should be able to control their wives’ lives – including their weight, spending habits, television viewing, and when they have sex.

These ideas stem from a belief in fundamental differences between men and women. Dominant values in the West (and some other parts of the world) promote traits characterised as “masculine” (logic, reason, conflict, individualism) and disparage traits considered to be “feminine” (emotion, collectivity, cooperation, being other-oriented).

Valuing one set of traits over another promotes the idea that men are more suited to being leaders in politics and business, while women are more suited to life in the home. Much of this is driven by the needs of capitalism, which has privatised domestic care.

As families have increasingly become less able to survive on one salary alone, this model has become untenable for many, with women increasingly entering the workforce over the past 50 years. Even so, these gendered roles have largely stayed the same.

Masculinists trace what they perceive as a collapse in good governance to women’s involvement. They argue not only that women shouldn’t be political leaders, but that they shouldn’t have the right to vote. Some, such as Wilson, advocate returning to a “family vote”, where male heads of households get to decide on the vote for the entire house.

Masculinists want men to have control in the family too. They promote the return to men being the heads of households and women being subservient homemakers and child-rearers. This aligns with white supremacist views.

Some masculinists believe that in pursuing careers, white women stopped having enough babies, resulting in a “replacement” of white people with people of colour.

Uniting the far right

Masculinism is an idea – and a movement – we need to take seriously. There are no serious moves to abolish suffrage, ban women from politics, or legally force them back into the home – yet. But these ideas are becoming increasingly mainstream in the US, as Wilson’s association with the upper echelons of the US government shows.

“Bit by bit we start to break down these walls … and then one day, we become the mainstream,” said Fuentes in a 2019 livestream, outlining his own strategy.

Despite the serious allegations he has faced, Andrew Tate and his ideas have received widespread political support, including allegations the Trump White House intervened in his case in Romania to have a travel ban lifted. (The White House denies backing the Tates in this way.) It is unclear what impact the Tate brothers’ weekend arrest will have on the support they receive.

Australia has yet to go as far as the US, with no mainstream leaders espousing views as extreme as the Tates or Wilson in the US. However, One Nation has increasingly adopted men’s rights and anti-feminist views, evidenced by Pauline Hanson’s recent attack on paid parental leave. Anti-feminist sentiment is also growing in the country, and Andrew Tate himself has become a very popular (albeit contested) figure here.

Feminists and anti far-right groups continue to resist this ideology – through the #metoo movement, for example, and in ongoing fights for abortion rights, increased pay for women, rights for trans people, and so much more.

However, the role of misogyny and masculinist thinking is still often ignored by those studying and fighting against far-right organisations – particularly security agencies, but also many mainstream researchers. Misogyny is often seen as a “lesser” extremism, ignoring the real violence this ideology creates.

Masculinism as a movement, however, is gaining steam. We must tackle it, both to stop the epidemic of violence against women and to ensure we don’t lose the gains feminism has made.

Simon Copland does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.