What do you think?
Rate this book
Healing from Hate: How Young Men Get Into—and Out of—Violent Extremism
By the time Matthias was in seventh grade, he felt he’d better belong to some group, lest he be alone and vulnerable. The punks and anarchists were identifiable by their tattoos and hairstyles and music. But it was the skinheads who captured his imagination. They had great parties, and everyone seemed afraid of them. “They really represented what it meant to be a strong man,” he said.
What draws young men into violent extremist groups? What are the ideologies that inspire them to join? And what are the emotional bonds forged that make it difficult to leave, even when they want to?
Having conducted in-depth interviews with ex–white nationalists and neo-Nazis in the United States, as well as ex-skinheads and ex-neo-Nazis in Germany and Sweden, renowned sociologist Michael Kimmel demonstrates the pernicious effects that constructions of masculinity have on these young recruits. Kimmel unveils how white extremist groups wield masculinity to recruit and retain members—and to prevent them from exiting the movement. Young men in these groups often feel a sense of righteous indignation, seeing themselves as victims, their birthright upended in a world dominated by political correctness. Offering the promise of being able to "take back their manhood," these groups leverage stereotypes of masculinity to manipulate despair into white supremacist and neo-Nazi hatred.
Kimmel combines individual stories with a multiangled analysis of the structural, political, and economic forces that marginalize these men to shed light on their feelings, yet make no excuses for their actions. Healing from Hate reminds us of some men's efforts to exit the movements and reintegrate themselves back into society and is a call to action to those who make it out to help those who are still trapped.
What draws young men into violent extremist groups? What are the ideologies that inspire them to join? And what are the emotional bonds forged that make it difficult to leave, even when they want to?
Having conducted in-depth interviews with ex–white nationalists and neo-Nazis in the United States, as well as ex-skinheads and ex-neo-Nazis in Germany and Sweden, renowned sociologist Michael Kimmel demonstrates the pernicious effects that constructions of masculinity have on these young recruits. Kimmel unveils how white extremist groups wield masculinity to recruit and retain members—and to prevent them from exiting the movement. Young men in these groups often feel a sense of righteous indignation, seeing themselves as victims, their birthright upended in a world dominated by political correctness. Offering the promise of being able to "take back their manhood," these groups leverage stereotypes of masculinity to manipulate despair into white supremacist and neo-Nazi hatred.
Kimmel combines individual stories with a multiangled analysis of the structural, political, and economic forces that marginalize these men to shed light on their feelings, yet make no excuses for their actions. Healing from Hate reminds us of some men's efforts to exit the movements and reintegrate themselves back into society and is a call to action to those who make it out to help those who are still trapped.
284 pages, Hardcover
Published March 23, 2018
15 people are currently reading
857 people want to read
About the author
Michael S. Kimmel
63 books195 followersMichael Scott Kimmel is an American sociologist, specializing in gender studies. He is among the leading researchers and writers on men and masculinity in the world today. The author or editor of more than twenty volumes, his books include The Politics of Manhood, and The History of Men (2005).
His documentary history, "Against the Tide: Pro-Feminist Men in the United States, 1776-1990" (Beacon, 1992), chronicled men who supported women’s equality since the founding of the country. His book, Manhood in America: A Cultural History (1996) was hailed as the definitive work on the subject. Reviewers called the book "wide-ranging, level headed, human and deeply interesting," "superb...thorough, impressive and fascinating."
His most recent book, Guyland: The Perilous World Where Boys Become Men (2008) is a best-selling investigation of young people’s lives today, based on interviews with more than 400 young men, ages 16-26. Feminist icon Gloria Steinem said that "Michael Kimmel's Guyland could save the humanity of many young men – and the sanity of their friends and parents."
Kimmel holds the position of Distinguished Professor of Sociology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook in New York, and is a spokesperson of NOMAS (The National Organization For Men Against Sexism).
He lives in Brooklyn, New York with his family.
His documentary history, "Against the Tide: Pro-Feminist Men in the United States, 1776-1990" (Beacon, 1992), chronicled men who supported women’s equality since the founding of the country. His book, Manhood in America: A Cultural History (1996) was hailed as the definitive work on the subject. Reviewers called the book "wide-ranging, level headed, human and deeply interesting," "superb...thorough, impressive and fascinating."
His most recent book, Guyland: The Perilous World Where Boys Become Men (2008) is a best-selling investigation of young people’s lives today, based on interviews with more than 400 young men, ages 16-26. Feminist icon Gloria Steinem said that "Michael Kimmel's Guyland could save the humanity of many young men – and the sanity of their friends and parents."
Kimmel holds the position of Distinguished Professor of Sociology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook in New York, and is a spokesperson of NOMAS (The National Organization For Men Against Sexism).
He lives in Brooklyn, New York with his family.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
February 27, 2018
Young men around world are angry and we are perceiving the first symptoms of that anger around the world.
from the rise of ISIS in Muslim world to populist and alt-right politics in Europe to mass shootings in America
in all of this the Men are showing signs of of resistance to women empowerment and change of roles in modern family
longer review to come
from the rise of ISIS in Muslim world to populist and alt-right politics in Europe to mass shootings in America
in all of this the Men are showing signs of of resistance to women empowerment and change of roles in modern family
longer review to come
November 25, 2018
I found this an insightful book but I was a little disappointed that Kimmel does not critique the toxic construct of masculinity that makes young men vulnerable to "aggrieved entitlement," violence, lack of social support and emotional intimacy, and stunted emotional growth in the first place. I think it would also be worth exploring parallels between violent extremist groups and militaries with regard to recruitment/ motivation to join.
May 1, 2019
The personal stories were really eye-opening. This is something I do not understand at all, being in such a terrible state that you're swept up into groups like this.
December 5, 2018
This was interesting in terms of vignettes and personal stories, and makes the case that young men – which is the predominant population in hate groups – can leave and regain a more balanced approach to life.
There is a proposition that all types of hate groups on all sides, function in the same way, and fill a lonely place these men have in their hearts. Islam or islamophobic, white or black, the men have a similar need.
The redemption stories are also interesting and similar in the way help groups have been started to help them.
It isn’t a book that engaged me a lot, and perhaps I was expecting a study. In many ways, the anecdotes have as much value, but began to seem like the same story over and over again.
There is a proposition that all types of hate groups on all sides, function in the same way, and fill a lonely place these men have in their hearts. Islam or islamophobic, white or black, the men have a similar need.
The redemption stories are also interesting and similar in the way help groups have been started to help them.
It isn’t a book that engaged me a lot, and perhaps I was expecting a study. In many ways, the anecdotes have as much value, but began to seem like the same story over and over again.
October 17, 2018
An examination of was forces are leading men to join extremist groups; one of the major factors being perceived assaults to their masculinity. This is a somewhat "obvious" book in terms of intuitively making sense with no large revelations.
However, the real "meat" is the interview with former members of extremist groups and what got them out of the cycle. This qualitative aspect brings a human side to it, without empathizing with those assholes. (I.e. Amazon had a few negative reviews with people not clearing reading the book, calling the author a "cuck".)
However, the real "meat" is the interview with former members of extremist groups and what got them out of the cycle. This qualitative aspect brings a human side to it, without empathizing with those assholes. (I.e. Amazon had a few negative reviews with people not clearing reading the book, calling the author a "cuck".)
May 17, 2018
this is a powerful and important book. his organization is not always clear. for instance, a lot of the best bits about hate group in the US is in the section on Great Britain. he shows, indirectly, the evil of the u.s. obsession with Islam and it's few terrorist s, whereas there is clearly more Danger from homegrown, alt right, white supremacist then there is those who follow Islam. all in all, a great read.
December 2, 2018
Super relevant topic in today's society. Interesting read
October 18, 2024
Could not get into this book. Author did a lot of telling, less showing. The biographical sections were pretty dry and the chapters felt a bit aimless.
The tl:dr is that teens who feel failed by their family or society, or feel like they're failing (it's the same thing in their head) develop "aggrieved entitlement" that they direct at an out-group. They then relieve their feelings through violence toward that group. This makes them feel like they're proving their manhood, something stripped by their usual disempowered state. Many are recruited through community outreach, in or out of jail, so they often feel like the gang is their real family.
This was the meat of the chapters I read, which seemed to contradict the intro where he insists extremists can even be normal middle-class people just doing jihad socially. He did reconcile this in the Jihad chapter, clarifying that these middle class malcontents are men with college degrees and no job prospects.
His primary point, though, is that aggrieved entitlement only turns into violence in young men who need to prove their manhood. That's his whole point. That we need to reframe the narrative around extremist not as one of "disenfranchised youth" but rather as a "crisis of masculinity."
However, I think he fails for two reasons. Firstly, because all the men in this book are disenfranchised youth, for whom that becomes a crisis of masculinity. Or maybe not, maybe their disenfranchisement becomes less painful when they act out swagger. Or maybe they only act like that because their gang does, and being part of a gang is as franchised as you can get. In any case, masculinity appears to be a facet of their problem but moreso their solution, not the primary driver Kimmel wants to make it.
The second failure here is this: The only purpose in reframing a problem is to pose a novel solution that crystallizes when you look at the problem from a different angle. Kimmel does not have a solution. Looking from his angle doesn't give us a new view or an "aha!" moment. He just wants you to know THAT IT'S THE MEN OKAY THEY ARE THE PROBLEM NOT YOUTH JUST MALE YOUTH. Do we really need this? Sorry Kimmel but this feels like a simp take. (Couldn't resist.)
To put a finer point on it: both men and women who feel a lack of agency will act out. Men are more likely to do it violently. But being male isn't the problem. It just directs the misbehavior in a particular direction. The problem is still the lack of agency.
Anyway. Some interesting vignettes in here, but nothing mind-blowing.
The tl:dr is that teens who feel failed by their family or society, or feel like they're failing (it's the same thing in their head) develop "aggrieved entitlement" that they direct at an out-group. They then relieve their feelings through violence toward that group. This makes them feel like they're proving their manhood, something stripped by their usual disempowered state. Many are recruited through community outreach, in or out of jail, so they often feel like the gang is their real family.
This was the meat of the chapters I read, which seemed to contradict the intro where he insists extremists can even be normal middle-class people just doing jihad socially. He did reconcile this in the Jihad chapter, clarifying that these middle class malcontents are men with college degrees and no job prospects.
His primary point, though, is that aggrieved entitlement only turns into violence in young men who need to prove their manhood. That's his whole point. That we need to reframe the narrative around extremist not as one of "disenfranchised youth" but rather as a "crisis of masculinity."
However, I think he fails for two reasons. Firstly, because all the men in this book are disenfranchised youth, for whom that becomes a crisis of masculinity. Or maybe not, maybe their disenfranchisement becomes less painful when they act out swagger. Or maybe they only act like that because their gang does, and being part of a gang is as franchised as you can get. In any case, masculinity appears to be a facet of their problem but moreso their solution, not the primary driver Kimmel wants to make it.
The second failure here is this: The only purpose in reframing a problem is to pose a novel solution that crystallizes when you look at the problem from a different angle. Kimmel does not have a solution. Looking from his angle doesn't give us a new view or an "aha!" moment. He just wants you to know THAT IT'S THE MEN OKAY THEY ARE THE PROBLEM NOT YOUTH JUST MALE YOUTH. Do we really need this? Sorry Kimmel but this feels like a simp take. (Couldn't resist.)
To put a finer point on it: both men and women who feel a lack of agency will act out. Men are more likely to do it violently. But being male isn't the problem. It just directs the misbehavior in a particular direction. The problem is still the lack of agency.
Anyway. Some interesting vignettes in here, but nothing mind-blowing.
May 30, 2019
I didn't quite finish this, but I think I read enough to rate it. It was interesting but really seemed to be missing something. Basically he says men get into extremist movements because they like white power music, are looking for a group of friends, are fat (ok, he doesn't say that exactly, but he really likes to tell us when his subjects are "chubby" and how they were bullied), and their parents are divorced. It seems so surface-level, and I guess that is partly his point, that racism isn't always so deep-seated, that people just get drawn in when they're looking for a place to belong. But most of the traits that he says make someone susceptible are so common that it didn't feel like a sufficient explanation. Plus he kept saying masculinity was a major factor but never really talked about the ways masculine hegemony is conveyed in ordinary non-skinhead culture.
The parts about how men "jump", i.e. leave racist extremist groups also disappointed me. He says generally people jump because they get older and can't handle all the parties and fights, or because their girlfriends want them to leave, or because they notice some hypocrisy in the group leaders. Most of these reasons don't offer any potential action steps for people who want to encourage extremists to leave, we just need to wait for them to get older. He does mention contact with the hated groups as a factor, though he attributes contact theory to someone named Pettigrew instead of Gordon Allport. I wish he had separated the discussion of unaffiliating from an extremist group (which one can do without changing beliefs) from the actual unraveling of racist beliefs. If someone stops being an active skinhead but still votes for racist politicians then I don't see their "jumping" as that much of a victory.
The parts about how men "jump", i.e. leave racist extremist groups also disappointed me. He says generally people jump because they get older and can't handle all the parties and fights, or because their girlfriends want them to leave, or because they notice some hypocrisy in the group leaders. Most of these reasons don't offer any potential action steps for people who want to encourage extremists to leave, we just need to wait for them to get older. He does mention contact with the hated groups as a factor, though he attributes contact theory to someone named Pettigrew instead of Gordon Allport. I wish he had separated the discussion of unaffiliating from an extremist group (which one can do without changing beliefs) from the actual unraveling of racist beliefs. If someone stops being an active skinhead but still votes for racist politicians then I don't see their "jumping" as that much of a victory.
January 29, 2024
Finished "Healing from Hate" by Michael S. Kimmel. It's underwhelming. First off, I should mention Kimmel is an abuser. But anyhow I'm disappointed at the waste of the premise of the book. Kimmel interviews a number of former extremists and analyzes their issues through the lens of masculinities.
The actual sociology is alright. But for all Kimmel talks about the need for a gendered analysis Kimmel never discusses structural issues.
So many of the former extremists had childhood experiences of abusive and overcontrolling families. Kimmel does not discuss family abolitionism, child care or workplace gender equality.
As Christian Picciolini says extremists are searching after Identity, Community and Purpose. Finding new connections after involvement in a hate movement is consistently one of the major challenges of former extremists. So why doesn't Kimmel discuss how capitalism, gentrification and urban sprawl lead to social isolation?
Also you'd expect a criticism of the criminal justice system as a whole. Many of the formers were radicalized in prison and even mention prison race gangs being encouraged by the wardens. Prison is surely an emasculating and shameful experience. People should not be surprised that men coming out of prison seek an affirmation of their masculinity in gang violence and hate movements. Why doesn't Kimmel call for defunding the criminal justice system?
Or an anarchist might bring up the state's monopoly on violence. What is more emasculating than being disallowed self-defense against your abuser?
I don't expect agreement on these issues. But I am looking for any kind of mention of structural issues. Kimmel's "Healing from Hate" simply does not discuss former extremists from a masculinities perspective.
The actual sociology is alright. But for all Kimmel talks about the need for a gendered analysis Kimmel never discusses structural issues.
So many of the former extremists had childhood experiences of abusive and overcontrolling families. Kimmel does not discuss family abolitionism, child care or workplace gender equality.
As Christian Picciolini says extremists are searching after Identity, Community and Purpose. Finding new connections after involvement in a hate movement is consistently one of the major challenges of former extremists. So why doesn't Kimmel discuss how capitalism, gentrification and urban sprawl lead to social isolation?
Also you'd expect a criticism of the criminal justice system as a whole. Many of the formers were radicalized in prison and even mention prison race gangs being encouraged by the wardens. Prison is surely an emasculating and shameful experience. People should not be surprised that men coming out of prison seek an affirmation of their masculinity in gang violence and hate movements. Why doesn't Kimmel call for defunding the criminal justice system?
Or an anarchist might bring up the state's monopoly on violence. What is more emasculating than being disallowed self-defense against your abuser?
I don't expect agreement on these issues. But I am looking for any kind of mention of structural issues. Kimmel's "Healing from Hate" simply does not discuss former extremists from a masculinities perspective.
April 21, 2022
Another great book from Kimmel. He may have accusations of sexual harassment over him, but the research is top notch. The book is based on interviews of current and ex-violent extremists (Neo-Nazis and Jihadists) that takes a gendered approach on the analyses of their radicalisation
Incredibly the gendered approach dos not present nothing much new about radicalization that other researchers have not found. That just shows that the main components of radicalization are already known. Just the details are contested. The most interesting thing is that the ages between 13-15 are the most dangerous for a young male of any demographic. It is in that age that they seek a ideal model of manhood and if their family have none, they will find it on the streets and internet.
Incredibly the gendered approach dos not present nothing much new about radicalization that other researchers have not found. That just shows that the main components of radicalization are already known. Just the details are contested. The most interesting thing is that the ages between 13-15 are the most dangerous for a young male of any demographic. It is in that age that they seek a ideal model of manhood and if their family have none, they will find it on the streets and internet.
August 19, 2022
Interesting and worthwhile, but I can’t decide how I feel about this author’s writing style. It’s decently engaging, but also repetitive and not very well structured (points seem to transition and arise at random half of the time). I’m ready to take a break from reading about angry men for a bit lol.
November 14, 2022
This was a fantastic book looking at the gendered element of extremism. A lot of men join the alt-right and other similar organisations based on a sense of shame and loss of masculinity. A large part of the solutions should factor in ways to change ideas of what makes a man, and provide spaces where people feel they belong and matter. Places that don't resort to extreme violence and hate.
June 19, 2022
I read this book in a sociology class for analytical purposes. Although I found it really interesting, I must say it also left me with unanswered questions. The link between theory and the empirical data does not feel solid, because anomalies and contradictions are not elaborated enough
January 27, 2024
Sad and frightening, but illuminating and sometimes hopeful. No matter how far you've gone down the wrong road, you can always turn around and walk the other way.
September 4, 2020
My heart does break for these noxious men. I’m not being sardonic. Really.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews