Incel: The Weaponization of Misogyny

by Katherine Denkinson

With the rise of interest in dramas such as Netflix’s Adolescence which aired in the UK in 2025, and a spate of crimes such as the Otley Run attack in April 2025, Incel culture has become headline news. This timely and much needed book separates the fact and the fiction around Incels in an increasingly anxious national conversation.

Katherine Denkinson explores the men behind the incel subculture and the misinformation that surrounds them. ‘Incel’ has often been used as a one-size-fits-all term for a wide range of communities, from vulnerable to niche, to outright misogynist and dangerous. However, the reality is not that simple.

Incels are not cartoonish villains, but real people. The internet has been their route to communication and connection, but it has also led to them becoming demonised. Who are these men? What are their motivations? How has our misunderstanding of this subculture made it seem even more dangerous?

 

About the author

Katherine worked in the mental health arena for many years before becoming a journalist and writer. She has a strong track record of writing on Incel culture, Andrew Tate, the Far Right and online radicalization. Her work has led to her frequent appearance as an expert commentator on these issues in national broadcasting, and in podcasts including hit podcast “Carrie Jade Does Not Exist”.

256 pages, Paperback

Expected publication March 10, 2026

Reviews

[Erin · Rating 3 out of 5]

ARC for review. To be published November 14, 2025.

3 stars

I really wanted to enjoy this more. I have seen a few incel chatrooms online (actually, no, they were MGTOW, and those are different, as I have learned from this book. They still hate women, just slightly differently, I guess.) Anyway, the vitriol from the men in those rooms made me curious about incels so I was looking forward to this book to learn more about them but I don’t feel this book did the best job of providing the type of information I was looking for.

Denkinson was fortuitous that the fabulous “Adolescence” on Netflix (she doesn’t love it) appeared as she was publishing her book as she mentions it many times in the text. My husband and I thought the series was incredible (and we weren’t the only ones as it cleaned up at the Emmy awards. The acting and cinematography are both outstanding. But I digress.). However, unlike what she believes I didn’t take the show to be any sort of statement on incel culture and, in fact, didn’t even relate the boy in the show to the movement at all until she mentioned it here.

I found the book a bit dry, which I thought it needn’t be, given the material at hand. First the author goes through the number of murders committed by those assumed to be related to the incel movement (or who have self-identified. She then explains at length why being an incel is not the same as being autistic (did anyone think it was?) but agrees that autistic young men can be more easily radicalized within with movement.

At base it seems the author believes that most misunderstand incels, but it was never really clear to me that she has a firm definition as to what, exactly, qualifies. I appreciated the end where she notes that young boys sometimes just need a safe space, and she lauds programs that make that available, but I also wonder whether, in today’s political climate, those types of services would be financially supported (along with most other social programming.)

The book is fairly U.K. centered, as far as studies and statistics. I am interested in the issue and, again, wish there had been more here. There’s definitely room for another book on the subject.

[Krystelle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for this ARC!

Sometimes it occurs to me how utterly exhausting living in our modern world must be, particularly for younger people navigating the traps and difficulties of relationships, social lives, and everything in between.

This book manages to form an incredibly powerful thesis from all the research and connections drawn. I found that I was nodding along with the findings presented, whether from personal experience or observed behaviours online.

Speaking of online, I think this is possibly the strongest part of this book and what is presented. There’s a tilt towards being chronically online these days, and it means that we’re building perceptions and relationships that lack the genuine understanding of the past. This book tackles this facet masterfully, balancing the perks of the internet with the pitfalls.

I do wish that in parts it went slightly further, but I also appreciate it would have made for an even longer book when it was already quite lengthy!

The book also looks towards future facing solutions, which, realistically, a dialogue is required for. I do wish it went a little further with possibilities for management, but I understand we’re stuck with a moral quandary and it’s so hard to approach what is essentially extremism, particularly in younger people.

With the divide between so many groups and the way that we approach things in the modern era, more books like this are so necessary, and I applaud the focus on a topic that others are less willing to broach.

[Sarah Morris · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a topic that I have had interest in for awhile, and I have been hesitant to research due to the MANY uneducated viewpoints out there concerning it (as there is about almost anything currently). This was a very engaging account, and the author seems to have a great deal of experience in this area-along with the great amount of extra research that has obviously been done. I liked the way the author researched the Incel movement from the very beginning-how it has morphed into something completely opposite of what it started out as.

The lost star for me was that it was somewhat hard to follow at times. Cases tended to jump around, and I was like, "Wait, who are we hearing from right now?" However, the material was overall very interesting-and that made the confusion less important to me. I enjoyed it, and would recommend it to readers interested in the subject, as well as for my die-hard nonfiction folks.

**Thanks to Netgalley, Aurora Metro Books, and Riverlight Press for an ARC copy of this book.

[Brian Shevory · Rating 4 out of 5]

Many thanks to River Light Press and NetGalley for providing me with an advanced copy of Katherine Denkinson’s urgent and necessary new book Incel: The Weaponization of Misogyny. While I found the subject matter really difficult to read at times, I also feel that it is important to learn more about the Incel community, especially since I’ve learned that a lot of the slang terms and lingo my kids use has been derived from incel forums thanks to Adam Aleksic’s Algospeak. I was actually really surprised to learn that words like sigma and their interest in jawlines were attributable to incels’ infatuation with male hierarchies and appearances. Aleksic’s chapter was revealing in helping me understand the origin, but also somewhat disturbing to think that these terms my kids regularly use come from such places of loathing and hatred. However, as Aleksic notes, the movement of these terms from the hate-filled and desperate forums of incels to more popular forums and into the mouths of children who consume content without thinking much about it has done much to reduce its meaning and bite. This is also something that Denkinson’s book aims to tackle in trying to understand and humanize incels. What I appreciated most about Denkinson’s book was her educative approach in shifting out common misperceptions and misunderstandings about incels, and how other groups of males are often lumped into this subdivision of young men for issues of convenience, sensationalism, and laziness. First, as Denkinson points out, the term incel was initiated by a woman who wanted to form an online community of other involuntary celibates. Denkinson actually contacted one of the original members of this online community, and his story about finding not only community, but also love and companionship, demonstrates how the current iteration of incel is one based more on nihilism and hatred and does not really reflect the initial attempts of involuntary celibates to find companionship.
Citing the popularity of the recent series Adolescence, Denkinson explores how the media will often latch onto a specific definition of misogyny, like the kind perpetrated by the Tate brothers, but actually lump it in with incels. Although she notes that the popularity of the show has brought these instances of misogyny out of the darkest corners of the internet and provided parents with some important information about their children, she also questions whether these kinds of shows are sensationalizing or mischaracterizing incels and possibly doing more damage to building bridges of understanding between parents and their sons. In another instance of mischaracterizing incels, Denkinson also explains that Eliot Rogers, whose manifesto and violent, misogynistic rampage have been attributed to incels, never actually identified as an incel. Rather, others in online spaces like reddit and 4chan eventually took Rogers’s words and actions and used them as a way to support their ideas about masculinity, feminism, and how relationships work. However, what I found most striking about Denkinson’s book is how she explains that “Incels did not emerge from a social media chrysalis raging against the world. They are real people, not digital boogeymen, and while the responsibility for incel attacks lies solely with the men who commit them, prevention requires a radical rethink of our societal approach.” Thus, her book has several important takeaways. For one, Denkinson works to humanize incels, helping to recognize the various factors that radicalize or incite young men to take these kinds of nihilistic and misogynistic perspectives. Furthermore, Denkinson’s research, experience and interviews with others helps to dispel many myths about incels, specifically how frequently the media and the public misconstrue misogyny and incels. Denkinson cites several cases, as well as her own experience working with men with disabilities, to identify how frequently their actions or behaviors can be lumped into the incel rubric without closely examining their backgrounds and motives to better understand the consequences of their crimes. She cites an example of a van rampage that happened in Toronto as one instance where the media sought to identify the crime as an incel attack, but upon closer investigation, the perpetrator wanted the attention and infamy that come from these kinds of attacks, not necessarily for ideological purposes. Denkinson’s research takes readers into dark spaces and recalls many tragic and horrific crimes, including those in Norway, New Zealand, and Pittsburgh, PA to further illustrate how online spaces can often lead to a kind of radicalization that is sometimes conflated with incels, but more often has to do with ideas of racism and white supremacy. Another important element in Denkinson’s research is exploring how “black pilling” works, and how right-wing approaches to consensus building and questioning ideas through “red pilling,” whose origins were from The Matrix. The idea of black pilling takes this kind of questioning of the nature of the world to the darkest and most desperate places, and I found it rather hard to read. Black pilling includes some of the most nihilistic thinking online, and I just wondered whether any of these guys would benefit from some kind of therapy or medication. Furthermore, their thinking about relationships and understanding women is so warped and misconstrued that I also wondered how they grew to think like this. Denkinson seems to argue that the original intent of online spaces offered a sense of community and support, but that these incel spaces and forums offer little in the way of community, but more like a commiserative space where men can release their grievances and resentments towards the world. While relationships are hard, Denkinson points to various media portrayals of romance and relationships and the simplicity of falling in love for sending the wrong ideas to young men. I agree to an extent, but I think that Denkinson’s other points that note that there are numerous variables involved in black pilling young men, and that the rise of content and media has definitely produced more misconceptions about women, feminism, and relationships.
Although incredibly dark, Denkinson’s book ends on a more positive note, detailing instances of positive masculinity and identifying some resources in the UK that provide young men with more positive approaches to masculinity. I really appreciated this information, as I appreciated the entirety of this book. The book was incredibly informative, and a reminder as a parent that connecting with one’s children is essential. Denkinson’s last chapter provides some sense of hope and ideas that parents, teachers, and others working with boys and young men can implement to steer them down a more caring path. This is a really important and necessary book for those who are working with young people, whether as a parent or an educator. Although the book is hard to read at some points, like the recent series Adolescence, it is an important insight into an often overlooked issue that is continuing to grow and metastasize in society. Denkinson provides practical scholarship and shares her experiences working with marginalized boys and men to better understand some of the risks and issues they experience. The book’s content is sometimes difficult, but she makes the ideas, examples, and practices accessible and easy to understand. Recommended and important reading!

[Kuu · Rating 2 out of 5]

Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for this ARC.

This was a very interesting, multifaceted exploration of incelibacy in the Anglosphere, delving into multiple issues such as the role autism (and societal stigma against autism) plays in driving young men towards incel forums; the ways in which inceldom, wider misogynist communities (such as PUAs and MGTOW), and the far right interact, overlap and differ; and other "intra-community" aspects. I do have quite a few criticisms, however.

Firstly, this book doesn't actually focus on incels as much as it is made out to be. Like half of the book is on groups that are decidedly NOT incels and why they are not incels, and then includes some explanation (sometimes longer, sometimes shorter) on why these communities are associated with incels, anyway. While very interesting for sure, I wasn't really looking for explanations on Sex Doll Lovers or waifuists/fictosexuals when I picked up this book, yknow? It reads more like a book on various socially excluded groups of men, and incels happen to be one of those groups, but not really the main focus, as opposed to what the title promises.

An additional aspect I view critically is the author's designation of who is and is not an incel, and what violence counts as incel violence. She lists several cases of men that self-identify as incels, among other identities, but whom she decides are not really incels and their violence (against women!) is not incel violence. She does explain why she thinks so, But I still view this critically because I wonder if she is continuing what others (such as Bates) have criticised when it comes to incel violence, which is reducing the violently misogynist motivation from their crimes and designating them crimes of the individual rather than crimes of a specific system of viokent misogyny. I wonder if this same kind of distancing despite VERY CLEAR self-identification would have happened if the violence in question had been "jihadist", for example, or if self-identification as belonging to a terrorist group is already enough to confirm that this violence is at least partially motivated by belonging to said terrorist group.
I think it would have made her argument stronger to also include counter-examples - examples of misogynist, incel violence that were mislabelled as (for example) the individual act of a mentally ill individual (as with the Gangnam Station Murder incident from South Korea). If she had taken this lens and critically examined in which cases inceldom is falsely called upon vs. in which cases inceldom is neglected and ignored, it would have made her analysis stronger and more convincing.

I also am not happy how the chapter on autism and incelibacy talks about other mental health conditions, specifically schizophrenia/psychosis and Cluster B personality disorders. While saying that these violent attacks by men on the autism spectrum should not be simplified as being due to their autism, instead the author appears to suggest that instead, we should blame their psychosis or their narcissistic/antisocial traits. While this isn't said outright, writing a whole page about how Elliott Rordger not only had autism(-like issues) but also scored high on narcissism and psychopathy, and how another violent attacker with ASD also had schizophrenia and was delusional, and that this is important to keep in mind as autistic people are only more likely to be in contact with the criminal justice system if they have a comorbidity, the implication is very much that autism is harmless, it's THOSE OTHER disorders we should be worried about, which I do not appreciate.

I also find that some of the rhetoric in this book gives an impression of "incel apologism", especially in combination with other marginalisations (an example being, again, the chapter on autism). Social isolation is mentioned as a driving factor, which is true and which is not something I wish to argue about, however, in the entire book I feel the nuance is lacking that more often than not, there has to be a latent misogyny/racism/anti-Semitism etc. present in order for people to get into specific spaces in the first place. From what I know (though I might of course be wrong), women are much less likely to be radicalised, even if they have ASD, even if they are socially isolated, even if they share all the same marginalisations as the radicalised men. Additionally, there are plenty men that do not fall into the radicalisation rabbit hole. I was somewhat disappointed that this was not addressed.

(Similarly, discussing the harrassment women gamers face online and then saying that such attitudes luckily no longer really exist offline... every person online is also a person offline, so these sentiments DO exist offline, they might just be more isolated.)

[Phil Smith · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book addresses a pattern of communication which is now almost universal, thanks to the monopolisation of the conduits of discourse by the small gang of private media oligarchs (both tech and old school). Katherine Denkinson expertly traces the way that, on their platfroms, a handful of very violent acts by young men who either identified as, or were identified as, involuntarily celibate were mis-characterised as part of an ‘incel movement’. A template was created, a folk demon invoked, and now whenever required to simplify or misrepresent, the mainstream or ‘citizen’ media will return to this poisoned well.
The term ‘incel’ was first used in 1997 by a female student in Canada who started a website to navigate with others her own loneliness and lack of “romantic and sexual experience”. This is just one of many surprises in Katherine Denkinson’s book. For the story of ‘Incel’ is one of repeated misrepresentations and misapprehensions. By addressing in detail a number of high-profile ‘Incel killings’, the author identifies how involuntary celibacy was either no part of the equation or only one of many factors at work (including intense expose to extreme pornography, bullying at school or college, psychotic misreading of fantasy fictions – including a belief that death could lead to a killer crossing over into a world of cartoons – and poor family relationships). At the same time, Denkinson narrates a disturbing series of developments, whereby the media’s shorthand characterisation of ‘incels’, as by their very nature a threat to others, particularly women, is weaponised by bad actors to promote hatred in the service of misogyny (generally under the flags of the far right).
‘Incel’ forensically analyse how a weaponisation of loneliness has been sewn into a raft of misogynistic ventures, from advocates for ‘pick-up culture’, to Andrew Tate, to ‘Men Going Their Own Way’ (all of which blamed feminism for in some ill-defined or fictional way undermining heterosexual relationships; the worst of them theorising women as subhuman others). The misogynists offered to incels an ‘explanation’ for their loneliness and feelings of inadequacy; under the guise of offering an online community they created swirling pools of memes of hatred and trolls of alienation with the intention of sucking people in, generating chaos online and spreading hate symbols. Denkinson is clear that most involuntary celibates rejected all or the larger part of this narrative.
The author does not stop at analysing the detailed manner in which loneliness is exploited for far-right causes and misogynistic ends. She goes on to look at what can bring help and community not only to those who are lonely and find romantic and sexual relationships harder than most, but also to challenge misogyny. In almost all cases solutions are labour-intensive and carefully structured – for example, not telling boys how to be ‘good’ men but in opposition to a patriarchy that “gives men privilege… and crushes those who do not conform to its stereotypes” giving boys the “agency and the freedom to design the man that they want to be” – not just in schools and colleges, but in youth centres (there are some heartening examples) where relationships with young people can be built over months and years. The failure of national governments to regulate dangerous violence-advocating online content has been matched by their massive defunding of youth work over the last generation.
Two things struck hardest from this excellent book.
First is the number of bad actors at work, from online figureheads and covert trolls to platform owners. But also how few of these have had to face any consequences for their active dismemberment of communities, women-directed hatred, misrepresentation of lonely people (and of those who do not sit easily within ‘norms’ of desire and subservience that the powers-that-be hypocritically assert) and their welcoming of the far-right into the minds of vulnerable folk. This is not just about the channelling f existing dominant patriarchal ideas but a creation and active promotion of extreme ones. The second thing is the need to reverse the assault on youth services, and for Labour’s extra £500 million for spending on youth services (announced June 2025) to be delivered and then sustained and increased year on year.

[J Earl · Rating 4 out of 5]

Incel: The Weaponization of Misogyny, by Katherine Denkinson, is a look at the world of the incel, which means also differentiating them from other groups as well as highlighting the nuance within the group.

This is a very accessible book, research is presented but not in a particularly dry manner. This isn't academic so much as it is a non-sensationalized attempt to closely define what makes an incel so that we, as a society, can work toward relieving some of the stressors that can lead a young man to choose this path. Yeah, choose seems odd when the very term uses the word involuntary, but that is largely self-naming and isn't really as accurate as one might think.

When I say this isn't a sensationalistic account I don't mean to imply the ugliness and the hatred are sugar-coated, just that they are presented with an end other than luring a reader who simply wants more hate-filled stories rather than a look at these people as human beings.

Denkinson does a nice job of expressing some compassion and understanding for the individuals without letting the system(s) that have caused the movement to grow off the hook. Ultimately, since a system and culture can be created, it can also be modified and made new. One of the first steps is making sure that we aren't discussing disparate groups under a name that fits just a subset of the total. If that were all that was accomplished here it would have been a wonderful start. But in addition to differentiating the various groups that have as many dissimilarities as similarities we are given case studies that are analyzed and finally some ideas for making not only the world safer from incels but help them feel better about themselves and the world around them. The world isn't perfect and neither are they, but we can't forget that neither are we. Results will be better if we try to understand the why even if we aren't able to relate to it very well.

Recommended for anyone with an interest in movements that have grown during the past several decades as the world becomes more polarized around every conceivable difference between us. I think those who might either be working with individuals or working on policies will gain a lot of insight.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.

[Melissa · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.75 ⭐️

Incels are a scary group so I was interested in picking this work up to learn more. I do think Denkinson did a fantastic job researching this subject and showing misogyny from various different lights. I learned about the various groups that revolve around (and are often mistaken for) incels. The case studies and in particular the interviews Denkinson herself did were very interesting and impactful.

I do think this book began to drag after a certain point. The latter half of the book felt a bit longer than it needed to be which made me end up putting down the book a few times around the 60% mark. Ultimately it did all come together and I really appreciated the messages the author was getting across.

I would recommend this book to readers interested in learning more on the subject. This is a great overview of incel culture and misogyny, but be aware it’s not a fun read.

Thank you to NetGalley, Aurora Metro Books, and River Light Press for access to this ARC. All opinions are my own.

[Maricruz Ramirez · Rating 3 out of 5]

My gratitude to NetGalley, Aurora Metro Books, and River Light Press for the ARC.

Katherine Denkinson approaches a complex and potentially harmful subject with notable sensitivity and open-mindedness. By examining how incel ideology develops, the book emphasizes the importance of understanding these pathways in order to prevent the spread of dangerous rhetoric and recruitment.

That said, the book places heavy emphasis on distinguishing incels from other misogynistic groups that reject the label. While language and categorization do matter, this focus occasionally felt overly technical - at times reading more like a work of linguistics than a book titled Incel. As a result, the pacing was slower than expected.

Overall, this book may be best suited for readers interested in understanding misogyny in a broader, analytical context rather than those expecting a more direct or accessible examination of incel culture specifically.

[Luna and Co · Rating 4 out of 5]

Katherine Denkinson gave me more than I expected in this book. I was not expecting to learn that much. We all hear the terms manosphere, incel, waifus and put these terms all together. I feel like now I can actually differentiate between them. Learning where they all came from and how they evolved was fascinating, and I'm so impressed at the amount of research the author did. I also liked to learn about how to counter those movements and protect our youth. Of course, big trigger warning tough, it was a slow read for me as it's reporting on violent, hate on women subjects, but worth it!

Thank you, Netgalley and Aurora Metro Books for providing me with an ARC in exchange for an honest review

[Jeni · Rating 3 out of 5]

This read was a mixed bag for me. To start with the positives, I feel like Denkinson really fleshed out the case studies she reviewed. Too often, we write off people such as incels as monsters or weirdos. However, if we don't actually take the time to understand the path to radicalization and recognize that these individuals had a path to becoming who they currently are, we don't learn how to prevent others from going down the same path. The negative for me was that I felt a good portion of the book was spent parsing out incels from other types of misogynists. While I find this valuable, it did become dry after a bit of time.

[Taylor Dauchy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Thank you for the ARC!

⭐️⭐️⭐️
I found this very interesting and informative. As someone raising a young boy, I really wanted to learn how incel culture came to be and what attracts young men to this lifestyle. I appreciate the framing by the author to not directly label these boys and men as monsters per se but show how violent and dangerous they can be to society while not making excuses for their behavior. I will definitely be recommending this, especially to those raising boys, to help us understand the full perspective of incels and how to prevent their harmful messaging from spreading.

[Cheyanne · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book looks at the different characteristics and behaviors of those labeled as "incels." The research is well done and presented in a way that is accessible to most readers. The author shows compassion to those labeled as incels, while also holding the societal system that created these behaviors accountable. Very well done and worth the read.