Mapping Substantive Misogynistic Rhetoric: A Linguistic Analysis of Cross-Platform Viral Incel Posts

• In Event: Under-explored Frontiers in Terrorism

Abstract

Despite considerable efforts to decode and counter misogynistic ideologies online, distinct portions of this interconnected web of ideological arguments have not only expanded both online and IRL but have even gained mainstream traction, including popular and social media. This trend, alongside recent scholarship on structural challenges facing boys and men, highlights the need for a more nuanced treatment of online misogynistic rhetoric. Specifically, it is crucial to distinguish between substantive arguments—those that have some validity (or are hard to falsify)—and low-effort, inflammatory posts that may serve as mere trolling or clickbait (and may overwhelm the analysis). To preferentially study substantive ideological arguments, we constructed a corpus of 14.8K incel posts that have reached a level of popularity (or virality) that manifested in a cross-platform attention. Compared to a crawler-based dataset of 124K Incels.co posts, this subset exhibited linguistic markers of a more structured and reasoned discourse, including fewer swearwords, increased punctuation use, longer words (≥6 letters), among others. By mapping the arguments within this corpus, this study aims to refine strategies for engagement, ensuring that responses address the most influential claims rather than reactionary rhetoric.

Author

• Shuki Cohen, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, CUNY