SC Connecticut News

Alex DiBranco, Ph.D. ’22, did not always expect to launch an institute for studying violent misogynist movements.

But as a graduate policy fellow with Yale’s Institution for Social and Policy Studies (ISPS), she gained insights into leadership and how she might apply her sociology training toward influencing policy and democracy.

“ISPS was a space early in my graduate career where I incubated an understanding of how supremacist movements built power,” DiBranco said of her mentorship under Jacob Hacker, ISPS faculty fellow and the Stanley B. Resor Professor of Political Science.

In 2014, a 22-year-old man killed six people and injured 14 others in an attack he described in a series of videos as retribution for his inability to find a girlfriend. Since then, a growing community of self-described incels, or involuntary celibates, have gathered online to — in some cases — celebrate the attack and share hatred against women. And while only a small percentage of incels advocate or perpetrate violence, The Secret Service’s National Threat Assessment Center has recently described such individuals as illustrative of the behavioral themes the center tracks to prevent acts of targeted violence.

In 2019, DiBranco founded the Institute for Research on Male Supremacism (IRMS), comprised of “a team of predominantly women scholars [who] believe that women must be respected leaders in responding to an ideology threatening our own lives.”

“I knew when I came into academia I wanted to pursue an alternative career path, though I didn’t know I would found a new organization,” she said. “ISPS provided a bridge to see how the work we do as scholars can have a real-world impact.”

We spoke recently with DiBranco about her organization and what she thinks we need to learn about male supremacism.

ISPS: Why did you create the Institute for Research on Male Supremacism (IRMS)? What need does it fill that wasn’t already being addressed by existing academic institutions and scholars?

Alex DiBranco: When I founded the institute in 2019, I had been working on topics around misogyny and male supremacism with a few colleagues. As we conducted our initial outreach to potential fellows, we found people in institutions around the world who were working on some aspect of male supremacist movements, but they were completely isolated. IRMS brings them together. We were all frustrated with research within academia and the nonprofit research field around different forms of supremacism and extremism because there was not a lot of attention to understanding misogynism through the lens of ideology.

ISPS: Can you please expand on that? For example, haven’t recent incidents of mass violence targeting women drawn increasing attention to male perpetrators who identify themselves as incels or involuntary celibate, and who direct their hatred toward women?

AD: These attacks have brought attention, but the causes are often discussed as poor mental health or loneliness. IRMS applies research to place the proper emphasis on the ideology of male supremacism and misogyny in the same way we can link anti-Black violence to racism and white supremacy.

ISPS: Why is it wrong to attribute incel-inspired violence to poor mental health or loneliness?

AD: You are asking why we don’t understand misogyny as ideology, and that’s a big core of the problem. I’ve written about how in misogynist incel violence, the attackers often select locations such as yoga studios or sororities — symbolic targets in the way an antisemitic or racist killer might select a synagogue or a Black church. For them, this is a symbol of the kind of women they are targeting, and they often say in writings and videos that they are seeking to strike fear in the hearts of other women.

ISPS: But you are saying that much of the conversation and even research around the causes of such incidents do not scrutinize the ideology of the attackers.

AD: Correct. The violence is not coded as supremacist. It’s just something we oddly accept. That acceptance is a product of male supremacism too. Our work at IRMS seeks to dissect all these things we are so used to glossing over and recognize them as male supremacist in the same way we understand White supremacism and visibility racism not just as individualized hatred and bigotry but as structuring mechanisms society.

ISPS: How do you define male supremacism?

AD: It’s belief or system cisgender men’s dominance over women erasure anyone who is not cisgender man woman.

ISPS: Cisgender describes someone who identifies with gender assigned birth other words transgender What do mean by “erasure?”

AD: It’s dominance nonbinary transgender people belief category nonbinary gender someone identifies neither female According this ideology identities general simply exist

ISPS How old ideology Has always existed some form

AD Male supremacism patriarchy core society Men asserted thousands years Over last half century shift active points mobilization preserve advances feminist movements achievements rights activists still falling short equity prompted misogynist men protect unquestioned status quo

ISPS What does share white antisemitic anti-gay anti-trans ideologies prejudiced target vulnerable populations

AD They sense superiority entitlement belief dominant population actually victims elements conspiracism false antisemitic theories hidden elite Jewish pulling strings power learn each other Since 1990 spread unfounded theory feminist elites calling shots behind scenes intersect alternate ways used recruit color makes groups look different traditional groups

If so old embedded culture hasn’t widely understood one things sort perversely invisible ubiquitous look count hate crime statistics counted disproportionate amount intimate partner sexual crimes overwhelm numbers domestic interpersonal large universal globe requires completely restructuring think things

sense scope problem estimate many people identify fairly labeled avowed incels challenging quantify access forums without counted different groups forums organizations typically monitor Southern Poverty Law Center only recently started looking developing tracking available most prominent forum about participants present website traffic report visitors Men Rights Reddit community subscribers last available statistic r/TheRedPill subreddit quarantine more subscribers

problem getting better United States current state implicit beliefs shaken suffrage #MeToo others organizing justice society level laws supporting control terms mobilizations growing becoming greater attempt re-establish influence especially past decade speech political emboldened supporters increases against including femicide major threat requires serious attention

preface book list explosion state abortion restrictions evidence yet Pew Research poll year found believe illegal cases endorse chapter Phyllis Schlafly key leader stopping Equal Rights Amendment influence promoting patriarchy complicity

Schlafly unique historical figure beliefs Especially many think endorsing True part culturally complicit operations certain conservative religions atheist movement trad wives influenced support system varying extents admit reality live honey badgers participate directly arguing belong home

Pew found gains expense majority perpetrators contemporary abolitionists severe stance criminalization led activists politicians

people religious ideological spectrum try use terms extremist radical create false understanding either KKK works somewhat sexist test results reveal bias question rights reduced objects incubators take away bodily autonomy Even protecting embryo grow born If goal reduce number occur outlawing procedure effective endorse exists movement

incel blames lack sexual social status drives type thinking core elements system domestic perpetrators hold patriarchal deep-seated sense entitlement provoked unjustly addition red-pillers framing unfair access demand present injustice find worthy endorsing mass concerned potentially violent term distinguish roots 1990s forum created bisexual genders sexualities Later sexist aligned pickup artists spaces began separate address question small number turn commit seen develops disproportionate numbers violent perpetrators itself threat manifest sorts ways harassment stalking vitriol threats common forms sexist behavior

blamed online culture spreading thinking before internet emphasis significance terrorism existed organized technological change nonprofits reaching massive mail campaigns easier reach anonymous leaderless big organization messaging possible inputs catch attention overall history new leads acts death learning long time chicken egg problem conventionally attractive sexually active hook angry insecure loners answer itself right self-reinforcing self-created cycle broken reason point having same abusers partners entitlement dehumanization fueling roots ends movement driven divorced paths intervene long anyone develops root beliefs looks comprehensive education based consent humanization focus K-12 curriculum Introducing perspectives literary canon overly focused protagonists single-dimensional objectified harassed critique currently white paper progress discuss approach depth behaviors serve red flags inspired act indicators almost previous instances harassment assault widespread hard warning mass seriously stalking framework dangerous speech useful help determine particular culture case study Project aims limit protecting free speech specific person But know going happen kind leads