The Psychology of the Manosphere
The Psychology of the Manosphere: Why the Incel Is a Symptom
The Psychology of the Manosphere: Why the Incel Is a Symptom
DESCRIPTION: What incel culture reveals about grievance, shame, and recognition. The manosphere between masculinity studies, lookism, and the longing to matter.
The Manosphere: The Incel as a Psychological Symptom
Incel culture reads involuntary celibacy as biological fate: women supposedly desire only dominant “Chads”, while one’s own value is graded as inferior and sorted out. Behind this ideology sits an injury that hardens into its own language and its own reading of the world. This article approaches the manosphere psychologically, as the symptom of an order of recognition that ties a man’s worth to his visible market value, and asks what wound makes this worldview so magnetic.
What the Manosphere Is and Who the Incels Are
The manosphere is a loosely connected network of blogs, forums, channels and influencers where ideas of masculinity and gender roles are negotiated, feminism is rejected, and anti-feminist, misogynistic worldviews are spread. A 2026 paper in the Nature portfolio describes it as “a heterogeneous, loosely connected network for articulations of contemporary masculinities and for the digital dissemination of misogynistic worldviews”. Its core milieus include pick-up artists, the “Men Going Their Own Way” movement, the various Red Pill currents, men’s rights activists and the incels, short for “involuntary celibates”.
Incel forums count as the most radical and ideologically dense end of this spectrum. Those who post there read their own lack of sexual and romantic experience through a biologically deterministic lens. The founding conviction runs like this: on an imagined “sexual market”, women desire only a small number of dominant men, while one’s own genes are graded as inferior and one’s social position as excluded. Out of this narrative grows a closed worldview that confirms every personal experience and explains away every experience to the contrary.
For a psychological reading, the starting point matters. Young men rarely arrive in these forums out of malice. They come carrying loneliness, experiences of rejection and a damaged sense of self-worth, and they find a language there that names their pain and hands it a cause. That is the pull, and that is where the radicalisation begins.
What the Blackpill Does to the Self-Image
The central interpretive frame is the Blackpill. Whoever “swallows” it takes on the conviction that attractiveness is largely fixed by genetics and decides the whole of one’s success in life. Improvement through behaviour, character or effort comes to look pointless. The figures of this cosmos are firmly assigned: “Chad” is the genetically privileged man, “Stacy” the desired woman, “Becky” the average one, “foid” a degrading abbreviation for woman. One’s own position within it is that of the “truecel”, the hopelessly excluded.
This self-description as biologically inferior and socially worthless cannot be read as a clinical diagnosis. The Nature paper puts it precisely: the narratives “should not be understood as indicators of individual psychological self-esteem in a clinical sense, but as a discursive self-positioning central to incel ideology”. The devaluation is therefore part of an ideology, a place one takes up in order to belong. It describes a real inner state and at the same time overwrites it with a pseudo-scientific explanation.
The Blackpill offers a paradoxical comfort. Whoever believes his fate is sealed in his genes no longer has to ask what he himself might change. Responsibility moves outward, to the genes, to women, to an order felt as unjust. The price is steep: hopelessness becomes a worldview, and the way out of isolation closes further.
Why the Manosphere Speaks Its Own Language
Incel culture has developed its own cryptolect, a coded private language with a dense vocabulary. Terms such as “hypergamy”, “betabuxing”, “looksmaxxing”, “subhuman” or “cucked” carry whole theories inside them. A single word is enough to summon a complete reading of the world. Linguistic studies describe this vocabulary as a variety of its own, with neologisms, fixed images and a strong boundary between inside and outside.
Language does two things here. It creates belonging, a “brotherhood” among the excluded, in which one is understood without having to explain oneself. And it closes the interpretation off. Whoever masters the vocabulary already holds the fitting term for every experience, and every term confirms the worldview. Objection from outside bounces off this linguistic armour, because it is immediately translated into the group’s own categories and devalued.
Read psychologically, this cryptolect is an attempt at symbolisation. Diffuse shame and powerlessness are given names, structure, an order. That grants a short-lived foothold. At the same time the language bars the way back, because it chains the pain to an ideology that preserves it and turns it outward instead of dissolving it.
What Lookism Is and How the Aesthetic Hierarchy Radicalises
Lookism describes the assessment and ranking of people by their appearance. In the manosphere it becomes a closed system. Faces are measured to the millimetre: jaw angle, cheekbones, the eye area, the shape of the skull. From such features the forums derive a fixed hierarchy in which everyone is assigned a rank. Research from 2026 links this hierarchised masculinity and the fixation on appearance to pathways of radicalisation among young men, pathways that can reach into far-right milieus.
The aesthetic hierarchy turns a soft social feeling, the feeling of not being enough, into a hard ranking with seemingly objective measurements. This is seductive, because it gives one’s own suffering a precise cause. Whoever feels ugly finds confirmation here that his worth really can be read off, in numbers, in proportions, in a market value. A feeling becomes a verdict, and the verdict becomes a fate.
From here a direct line runs to self-optimisation. Looksmaxxing ranges from skincare and training to risky practices such as bone-smashing, the deliberate striking of the facial bones in the hope of a sharper contour. The trend promises control over one’s own market value and delivers only a new stage for shame, because the bar keeps rising and the measured deficit remains.
The Injury Behind the Misogynist Ideology
Beneath the ideology lies a wound. Many of these men learned early what it means to be invisible, overlooked, devalued, without a mirror for a worth of their own. Rejection in the search for closeness then strikes an older wound, the feeling of being fundamentally unlovable. The forums give this wound a language and an address, and both bring short-lived relief.
The misogynist reading translates the injury into accusation. The pain of not being desired turns into the conviction that women are cruel, shallow and guilty. The Nature paper describes how personal frustration becomes a “moralised narrative of injustice” that converts individual suffering into collective outrage and can escalate into conspiracy fantasies of systematic oppression. The anger turned outward numbs the shame turned inward.
This movement from injury to ideology deserves attention without mockery. The ideology should be criticised; its hatred of women is dangerous and needs clear opposition. The men behind it remain people with a genuine distress. Treating them only as caricatures confirms the very experience of contempt that drove them into these forums.
What This Has to Do with Narcissistic Injury
The word narcissism is often used as an insult. In psychoanalysis it means something else. Freud described narcissism as an early stage in the making of the self, the stage in which the ego first takes shape at all. Kohut understood narcissistic disturbances as a consequence of missing mirroring: a child that finds no reliable echo of its own worth in the gaze of its caregivers stays dependent on a brittle sense of self that must be confirmed from outside again and again.
Kernberg and Lacan extend this picture. Kernberg described how an unstable self swings between fantasies of grandeur and devaluation, because a durable inner image of oneself is lacking. Lacan showed how the ego constitutes itself through the image in the mirror and through the gaze of the other. When that gaze is withheld or experienced as annihilating, one’s own existence begins to totter. In this tradition, narcissistic injury is an early disturbance of the self and of symbolisation, not a weakness of character and not a choice.
No one decides to be this vulnerable. Labelling these men narcissistic and considering the matter closed misses the point. In the manosphere one can watch an insecure self search for a mirror and find it in the collective of the forums, in the ranking of Lookism, in the shared image of an enemy. The mirror they receive there confirms their worthlessness and at the same time sells them a fantasy of grandeur, that of the knowing outcast.
Why the Movement Turns the Pain Outward
Shame is a barely bearable feeling. It aims at the whole person and leaves behind the sense of being wrong as a whole. Whoever is saturated with toxic shame looks for any way to be rid of the feeling. One common route is the transformation of shame into anger. Accusing others brings relief for a moment, because powerlessness flips into a capacity to act and the gaze turns away from one’s own wound and onto someone to blame.
Masculinity research captures this mechanism with the term “aggrieved entitlement”. It names the affective reaction to a perceived loss of something one supposedly deserves. When recognition, closeness and desire are thought of as a self-evident right and then fail to arrive, the feeling of having been cheated arises. This feeling feeds the hostility towards women, who appear as those withholding a good that is owed.
The Nature paper describes a “recognition dilemma” that sharpens this dynamic. Paid sex, for instance, cannot supply the longed-for recognition as a “real” man, precisely because it is experienced as an economic transaction and confirms the exclusion from the sphere of the desired. Recognition can neither be bought nor forced, and on exactly this point the hope the ideology promises breaks apart. The pain returns, and with it the search for a new culprit.
The Manosphere as the Symptom of an Order of Recognition
The manosphere can be read as the symptom of a culture that ties a person’s worth to visible metrics. Dating apps translate affection into swipes and hit rates. Social media such as TikTok make attention measurable. In such an environment one’s own worth appears as market value, as a position in a ranking that anyone can read off. Incel ideology drives this logic to its bitter end and declares the human being itself a commodity with a fixed price.
The Nature paper warns against playing these forums down as a fringe phenomenon. The discourses are “a radical expression of deep-rooted, normalised male entitlement which occurs in all social milieus”. The contempt spoken so openly there works with standards of assessment that, in a milder form, are widely shared and are often discussed in everyday life under the heading of toxic masculinity. The forums show under a magnifying glass what many experience more quietly: the pressure to make oneself attractive, to perform, to measure up.
At the same time the same paper urges caution towards a popular explanation. Talk of a “male loneliness epidemic” is not fit to soften the contempt for women into an understandable reaction to male frustration. Loneliness is real and must be taken seriously, yet it does not explain why the answer is sought in the devaluation of women. Holding both together, the genuine suffering and the responsibility for one’s own interpretation, keeps a critical distance from the ideology without deriding the people.
How Self-Optimisation, Powerlessness and Loneliness Connect
The manosphere promises a way out of powerlessness through self-optimisation. Looksmaxxing, training regimes, solo-maxxing as a retreat into the self-as-project, all of it offers a feeling of control in a situation experienced as hopeless. The film Fight Club showed this male powerlessness early on, the longing for hardness and meaning in a world that seems to hold no place for them any more. The forums translate the same powerlessness into a programme of bodily correction.
The programme does not keep its promise. Every optimisation creates a new bar, every number calls up the next. The measured deficit stays, because the gaze fixed on the deficit is itself the problem. Self-optimisation fed by shame deepens the shame, because it turns one’s own appearance and market value into a permanent testing ground. The way out of isolation is never actually walked, because the whole system makes no provision for it.
At the bottom lies loneliness. The loneliness machine of our time produces people who feel unconnected and whose experiences of connection increasingly run through screens. The manosphere offers membership of a collective, but demands in return the adoption of a worldview that makes real closeness impossible. Belonging at the price of hardening, that is the bargain these forums offer, and it keeps alive the loneliness it promises to ease.
The Key Points in Brief
• The manosphere is a loose network of online milieus that binds misogyny, sexism and anti-feminism together; incel forums form its most radical end and read involuntary celibacy in biologically deterministic terms.
• The Blackpill declares attractiveness genetically fixed and self-improvement pointless; this brings a paradoxical relief and cements the hopelessness.
• A cryptolect of its own creates belonging and at the same time closes off every interpretation, so that objection from outside bounces off.
• Lookism turns the feeling of not being enough into a measurable ranking and supplies pathways of radicalisation as well as risky self-optimisation such as bone-smashing.
• Beneath the ideology lies an injury; the misogynist reading turns shame into anger and casts women as those to blame.
• Narcissistic injury, in psychoanalytic terms, means an early disturbance of the self and of symbolisation (Freud, Kohut, Kernberg, Lacan), not a weakness of character and not a choice.
• “Aggrieved entitlement” and a “recognition dilemma” explain why the pain is turned outward and why recognition cannot be forced.
• The movement is the symptom of an order of recognition that ties human worth to visible market value; the ideology deserves criticism, the people behind it do not deserve derision.
Sources
• Iñigo, A. (2026): Navigating the Manosphere: A Scoping Review of Research on Masculinist and Misogynist Online Spaces. The Journal of Men’s Studies. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10608265251357869
• Schulz, C. & Herrberg, N. (2026): Exploring the manosphere’s discourse on prostitution: unraveling masculine self-perceptions. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-026-07648-4
• Theorising Incels and Co. (2026), Sociology Compass. https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/soc4.70161
• Hierarchized masculinity, appearance and radicalization (2026). https://direct.mit.edu/ecps/article/13/2/156/134604/Hierarchized-masculinity-appearance-and
Related
Fight Club Psychoanalytically: The Split Self and Male Powerlessness
The Loneliness Machine: Social Isolation, Loneliness and Inequality in Neoliberal Capitalism
Bone Smashing: A Dangerous Self-Optimisation Trend on Instagram
Gen Z and Dating Apps: Dating Recession and Solo-Maxxing Instead of Expensive Dates
DESCRIPTION: What incel culture reveals about grievance, shame, and recognition. The manosphere between masculinity studies, lookism, and the longing to matter.
The Manosphere: The Incel as a Psychological Symptom
Incel culture reads involuntary celibacy as biological fate: women supposedly desire only dominant “Chads”, while one’s own value is graded as inferior and sorted out. Behind this ideology sits an injury that hardens into its own language and its own reading of the world. This article approaches the manosphere psychologically, as the symptom of an order of recognition that ties a man’s worth to his visible market value, and asks what wound makes this worldview so magnetic.
What the Manosphere Is and Who the Incels Are
The manosphere is a loosely connected network of blogs, forums, channels and influencers where ideas of masculinity and gender roles are negotiated, feminism is rejected, and anti-feminist, misogynistic worldviews are spread. A 2026 paper in the Nature portfolio describes it as “a heterogeneous, loosely connected network for articulations of contemporary masculinities and for the digital dissemination of misogynistic worldviews”. Its core milieus include pick-up artists, the “Men Going Their Own Way” movement, the various Red Pill currents, men’s rights activists and the incels, short for “involuntary celibates”.
Incel forums count as the most radical and ideologically dense end of this spectrum. Those who post there read their own lack of sexual and romantic experience through a biologically deterministic lens. The founding conviction runs like this: on an imagined “sexual market”, women desire only a small number of dominant men, while one’s own genes are graded as inferior and one’s social position as excluded. Out of this narrative grows a closed worldview that confirms every personal experience and explains away every experience to the contrary.
For a psychological reading, the starting point matters. Young men rarely arrive in these forums out of malice. They come carrying loneliness, experiences of rejection and a damaged sense of self-worth, and they find a language there that names their pain and hands it a cause. That is the pull, and that is where the radicalisation begins.
What the Blackpill Does to the Self-Image
The central interpretive frame is the Blackpill. Whoever “swallows” it takes on the conviction that attractiveness is largely fixed by genetics and decides the whole of one’s success in life. Improvement through behaviour, character or effort comes to look pointless. The figures of this cosmos are firmly assigned: “Chad” is the genetically privileged man, “Stacy” the desired woman, “Becky” the average one, “foid” a degrading abbreviation for woman. One’s own position within it is that of the “truecel”, the hopelessly excluded.
This self-description as biologically inferior and socially worthless cannot be read as a clinical diagnosis. The Nature paper puts it precisely: the narratives “should not be understood as indicators of individual psychological self-esteem in a clinical sense, but as a discursive self-positioning central to incel ideology”. The devaluation is therefore part of an ideology, a place one takes up in order to belong. It describes a real inner state and at the same time overwrites it with a pseudo-scientific explanation.
The Blackpill offers a paradoxical comfort. Whoever believes his fate is sealed in his genes no longer has to ask what he himself might change. Responsibility moves outward, to the genes, to women, to an order felt as unjust. The price is steep: hopelessness becomes a worldview, and the way out of isolation closes further.
Why the Manosphere Speaks Its Own Language
Incel culture has developed its own cryptolect, a coded private language with a dense vocabulary. Terms such as “hypergamy”, “betabuxing”, “looksmaxxing”, “subhuman” or “cucked” carry whole theories inside them. A single word is enough to summon a complete reading of the world. Linguistic studies describe this vocabulary as a variety of its own, with neologisms, fixed images and a strong boundary between inside and outside.
Language does two things here. It creates belonging, a “brotherhood” among the excluded, in which one is understood without having to explain oneself. And it closes the interpretation off. Whoever masters the vocabulary already holds the fitting term for every experience, and every term confirms the worldview. Objection from outside bounces off this linguistic armour, because it is immediately translated into the group’s own categories and devalued.
Read psychologically, this cryptolect is an attempt at symbolisation. Diffuse shame and powerlessness are given names, structure, an order. That grants a short-lived foothold. At the same time the language bars the way back, because it chains the pain to an ideology that preserves it and turns it outward instead of dissolving it.
What Lookism Is and How the Aesthetic Hierarchy Radicalises
Lookism describes the assessment and ranking of people by their appearance. In the manosphere it becomes a closed system. Faces are measured to the millimetre: jaw angle, cheekbones, the eye area, the shape of the skull. From such features the forums derive a fixed hierarchy in which everyone is assigned a rank. Research from 2026 links this hierarchised masculinity and the fixation on appearance to pathways of radicalisation among young men, pathways that can reach into far-right milieus.
The aesthetic hierarchy turns a soft social feeling, the feeling of not being enough, into a hard ranking with seemingly objective measurements. This is seductive, because it gives one’s own suffering a precise cause. Whoever feels ugly finds confirmation here that his worth really can be read off, in numbers, in proportions, in a market value. A feeling becomes a verdict, and the verdict becomes a fate.
From here a direct line runs to self-optimisation. Looksmaxxing ranges from skincare and training to risky practices such as bone-smashing, the deliberate striking of the facial bones in the hope of a sharper contour. The trend promises control over one’s own market value and delivers only a new stage for shame, because the bar keeps rising and the measured deficit remains.
The Injury Behind the Misogynist Ideology
Beneath the ideology lies a wound. Many of these men learned early what it means to be invisible, overlooked, devalued, without a mirror for a worth of their own. Rejection in the search for closeness then strikes an older wound, the feeling of being fundamentally unlovable. The forums give this wound a language and an address, and both bring short-lived relief.
The misogynist reading translates the injury into accusation. The pain of not being desired turns into the conviction that women are cruel, shallow and guilty. The Nature paper describes how personal frustration becomes a “moralised narrative of injustice” that converts individual suffering into collective outrage and can escalate into conspiracy fantasies of systematic oppression. The anger turned outward numbs the shame turned inward.
This movement from injury to ideology deserves attention without mockery. The ideology should be criticised; its hatred of women is dangerous and needs clear opposition. The men behind it remain people with a genuine distress. Treating them only as caricatures confirms the very experience of contempt that drove them into these forums.
What This Has to Do with Narcissistic Injury
The word narcissism is often used as an insult. In psychoanalysis it means something else. Freud described narcissism as an early stage in the making of the self, the stage in which the ego first takes shape at all. Kohut understood narcissistic disturbances as a consequence of missing mirroring: a child that finds no reliable echo of its own worth in the gaze of its caregivers stays dependent on a brittle sense of self that must be confirmed from outside again and again.
Kernberg and Lacan extend this picture. Kernberg described how an unstable self swings between fantasies of grandeur and devaluation, because a durable inner image of oneself is lacking. Lacan showed how the ego constitutes itself through the image in the mirror and through the gaze of the other. When that gaze is withheld or experienced as annihilating, one’s own existence begins to totter. In this tradition, narcissistic injury is an early disturbance of the self and of symbolisation, not a weakness of character and not a choice.
No one decides to be this vulnerable. Labelling these men narcissistic and considering the matter closed misses the point. In the manosphere one can watch an insecure self search for a mirror and find it in the collective of the forums, in the ranking of Lookism, in the shared image of an enemy. The mirror they receive there confirms their worthlessness and at the same time sells them a fantasy of grandeur, that of the knowing outcast.
Why the Movement Turns the Pain Outward
Shame is a barely bearable feeling. It aims at the whole person and leaves behind the sense of being wrong as a whole. Whoever is saturated with toxic shame looks for any way to be rid of the feeling. One common route is the transformation of shame into anger. Accusing others brings relief for a moment, because powerlessness flips into a capacity to act and the gaze turns away from one’s own wound and onto someone to blame.
Masculinity research captures this mechanism with the term “aggrieved entitlement”. It names the affective reaction to a perceived loss of something one supposedly deserves. When recognition, closeness and desire are thought of as a self-evident right and then fail to arrive, the feeling of having been cheated arises. This feeling feeds the hostility towards women, who appear as those withholding a good that is owed.
The Nature paper describes a “recognition dilemma” that sharpens this dynamic. Paid sex, for instance, cannot supply the longed-for recognition as a “real” man, precisely because it is experienced as an economic transaction and confirms the exclusion from the sphere of the desired. Recognition can neither be bought nor forced, and on exactly this point the hope the ideology promises breaks apart. The pain returns, and with it the search for a new culprit.
The Manosphere as the Symptom of an Order of Recognition
The manosphere can be read as the symptom of a culture that ties a person’s worth to visible metrics. Dating apps translate affection into swipes and hit rates. Social media such as TikTok make attention measurable. In such an environment one’s own worth appears as market value, as a position in a ranking that anyone can read off. Incel ideology drives this logic to its bitter end and declares the human being itself a commodity with a fixed price.
The Nature paper warns against playing these forums down as a fringe phenomenon. The discourses are “a radical expression of deep-rooted, normalised male entitlement which occurs in all social milieus”. The contempt spoken so openly there works with standards of assessment that, in a milder form, are widely shared and are often discussed in everyday life under the heading of toxic masculinity. The forums show under a magnifying glass what many experience more quietly: the pressure to make oneself attractive, to perform, to measure up.
At the same time the same paper urges caution towards a popular explanation. Talk of a “male loneliness epidemic” is not fit to soften the contempt for women into an understandable reaction to male frustration. Loneliness is real and must be taken seriously, yet it does not explain why the answer is sought in the devaluation of women. Holding both together, the genuine suffering and the responsibility for one’s own interpretation, keeps a critical distance from the ideology without deriding the people.
How Self-Optimisation, Powerlessness and Loneliness Connect
The manosphere promises a way out of powerlessness through self-optimisation. Looksmaxxing, training regimes, solo-maxxing as a retreat into the self-as-project, all of it offers a feeling of control in a situation experienced as hopeless. The film Fight Club showed this male powerlessness early on, the longing for hardness and meaning in a world that seems to hold no place for them any more. The forums translate the same powerlessness into a programme of bodily correction.
The programme does not keep its promise. Every optimisation creates a new bar, every number calls up the next. The measured deficit stays, because the gaze fixed on the deficit is itself the problem. Self-optimisation fed by shame deepens the shame, because it turns one’s own appearance and market value into a permanent testing ground. The way out of isolation is never actually walked, because the whole system makes no provision for it.
At the bottom lies loneliness. The loneliness machine of our time produces people who feel unconnected and whose experiences of connection increasingly run through screens. The manosphere offers membership of a collective, but demands in return the adoption of a worldview that makes real closeness impossible. Belonging at the price of hardening, that is the bargain these forums offer, and it keeps alive the loneliness it promises to ease.
The Key Points in Brief
• The manosphere is a loose network of online milieus that binds misogyny, sexism and anti-feminism together; incel forums form its most radical end and read involuntary celibacy in biologically deterministic terms.
• The Blackpill declares attractiveness genetically fixed and self-improvement pointless; this brings a paradoxical relief and cements the hopelessness.
• A cryptolect of its own creates belonging and at the same time closes off every interpretation, so that objection from outside bounces off.
• Lookism turns the feeling of not being enough into a measurable ranking and supplies pathways of radicalisation as well as risky self-optimisation such as bone-smashing.
• Beneath the ideology lies an injury; the misogynist reading turns shame into anger and casts women as those to blame.
• Narcissistic injury, in psychoanalytic terms, means an early disturbance of the self and of symbolisation (Freud, Kohut, Kernberg, Lacan), not a weakness of character and not a choice.
• “Aggrieved entitlement” and a “recognition dilemma” explain why the pain is turned outward and why recognition cannot be forced.
• The movement is the symptom of an order of recognition that ties human worth to visible market value; the ideology deserves criticism, the people behind it do not deserve derision.
Sources
• Iñigo, A. (2026): Navigating the Manosphere: A Scoping Review of Research on Masculinist and Misogynist Online Spaces. The Journal of Men’s Studies. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10608265251357869
• Schulz, C. & Herrberg, N. (2026): Exploring the manosphere’s discourse on prostitution: unraveling masculine self-perceptions. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-026-07648-4
• Theorising Incels and Co. (2026), Sociology Compass. https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/soc4.70161
• Hierarchized masculinity, appearance and radicalization (2026). https://direct.mit.edu/ecps/article/13/2/156/134604/Hierarchized-masculinity-appearance-and
Related
Fight Club Psychoanalytically: The Split Self and Male Powerlessness
The Loneliness Machine: Social Isolation, Loneliness and Inequality in Neoliberal Capitalism
Bone Smashing: A Dangerous Self-Optimisation Trend on Instagram
Gen Z and Dating Apps: Dating Recession and Solo-Maxxing Instead of Expensive Dates