Content area
This research is driven by the expansion and popularity of the Manosphere network in the last decade, causing online and offline harassment of women. The study examines the phenomenon of the Manosphere in the Greek digital space and, more specifically, it researches the case of the popular, anonymous, and public accessed Facebook page of “Όχι, Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης” (No, you are not a misogynist). The study’s research questions are whether the Greek Manosphere follows the same patterns of the international Manosphere groups and how gendered identities and roles are represented in its discourse. In order to answer the research questions, the study combines the method of thematic analysis and the approach of critical discourse analysis. The “Όχι, Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης” (OΔΕΜ) page is found to be a case of the Men’s Rights Activists subculture of the Manosphere, with the main topic of interest being the online activism against feminism. Although the Facebook page reproduces traditional gender stereotypes and representations, a crucial difference from “classic” patriarchal perceptions is that the OΔΕΜ discourse portrays women as privileged, socially dominant and violent, while men are depicted as victims, discriminated by women and the social system. This inversion of reality is executed by the misinterpretation and falsification of data, along with the appropriation of activist and feminist discourse, which could lead to latent, or overt, misogynist perception and stereotypes (re)gaining popularity.
1. Introduction
This research is driven by the expansion and popularity of the so-called Manosphere in the last decade. The Manosphere is an unofficial network of social media groups and pages, websites, forums, blogs, etc., where its actors express their opinions about gendered roles, identities, and relations based on patriarchal and misogynistic theories, as well as their “concern” about feminism and how it threatens men’s rights (Rothermel, 2023). The research of the Manosphere is considered crucial since not only its participants are propagating hate speech through the internet, reproducing sexist stereotypes and engaging in online harassment, but they have also been linked with crimes in the non-digital world. “(…) the Manosphere appears to be linked with some violent incidents in the real world, and there are cases when members of the groups associated with the Manosphere ‘expressed their anger’ in a violent way (…) such as the mass shootings in Oregon and Isla Vista, cases of rape at college campuses, and Gamergate, the harassment campaign targeting female gamers and journalists” (Kyparissiadis & Skoulas, 2021, p. 205).
In the Greek digital space, the Manosphere has not achieved the same growth as in other western countries and the phenomenon has not been considered and discussed much neither in the academic field nor the news. Only a handful of articles for the Manosphere can be found in Greek media, mostly on the news website Lifo (Galanopoulou, 2023; Lifo Newsroom, 2023; The Lifo Team, 2023; Kalaitzidis, 2024). Nonetheless, there are Greek websites and social media groups of such kind (e.g., Όχι Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης (OΔΕΜ); Greek Red Pillers, 2025; ΣΥ.ΓA.ΠA, 2025; GentlemenOnly, 2025, etc.), that have gradually expanded in followers and influence during the last years, leading the way in targeting women in the public sphere.
This article aims to examine the Greek Manosphere and, more specifically, the case of the “Όχι Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης” (No, you are not a misogynist, n.d.-b) Facebook page (fb page). The research questions are as follows: Does the Greek Manosphere follow the same patterns of the international Manosphere groups? How gendered identities and roles are represented in the Greek Manosphere’s discourse?
The origins of the Manosphere can be traced back decades ago to the Men’s Rights movement, around the 1970s–1980s. This movement emerged as a backlash to the second wave of feminism and its achievements for gender equality, promoting instead the restoration of traditional concepts of masculinity and femininity and the consequential social roles for men and women (Lilly, 2016, pp. 36–37). The Men’s Rights movement evolved over the next decades, and in 1993, Warren Farrell “wrote the Myth Of Male Power (W. Farrell, 1993), which became a fundamental text to Men’s Rights Activists, claiming that men, and not women, are systematically disadvantaged in society” (Horta Ribeiro et al., 2021, p. 197). Those activists gradually, as everyone else, transferred to the online web, where new diverse groups formed under the notion that modern society is misandrist, thereby creating the Manosphere. The term “Manosphere” has first been recorded around 2009, and since then it has become accepted from Manosphere members themselves (Horta Ribeiro et al., 2021, p. 197). Although the Manosphere appeared on the web in the early 2000s, it seems that its influence is maximizing in the last decade as a backlash, once again, to online feminist activism, especially after the MeToo movement in 2017 (Dickel & Evolvi, 2022). The same observation can be drawn for the Greek online web as well, a few years later in 2021, as the Greek MeToo movement had begun (Harkiolakis, 2023). Discussions within the Manosphere network can range from self-help tips for men and legal advice, to “seduction” techniques and incitements to violent actions against women. Despite this heterogeneous content, the Manosphere’s main goal can be described as the use of “the Web as a tool to communicate its ideals, to gain followers and to reclaim its space in the public agenda relating to gender roles in society” (Kyparissiadis & Skoulas, 2021, pp. 203–204).
According to Lilly (2016, pp. 44–50), the Manosphere can be categorized into four main groups: Men’s Rights Activists, Men Going Their Own Way, PickUp Artists, and Involuntary Celibates (Incels).
The Men’s Rights Activists “subculture is perhaps the largest and most recognizable of the manosphere” (Lilly, 2016, p. 44). Usually, the participants of this subculture focus on launching attacks against feminist theories, as well as against anyone who supports these theories. The Men’s Rights Activists are also concerned about legal matters regarding the military, parenthood and spousal relations, and they demand the abolition of laws and programs for gender inclusion and equality, which are framed by these activists as sexist and biased acts against men (Lilly, 2016, p. 44).
The Men Going Their Own Way groups (less popular) support the separatism of men and women, rejecting any kind of relations with them except for sexual encounters—especially with western or “modern” women, as they describe anyone who is remotely a feminist. The actors of these groups are convinced that the main goal of women is to torture men, drawing the conclusion that, ultimately, the latter should completely disengage from society (Lilly, 2016, p. 46).
PickUp Artists, on the other hand, is a large community of the Manosphere who self-portraits as “alpha males” with the main concern being the heterosexual dating relations and, more specifically, how to win over as many sexual partners as possible. The members of this community objectify women by rating them according to their physical appearance and sexual behavior (Lilly, 2016, p. 48).
The Involuntary Celibates groups also view women as sexual objects and as objects of servitude to men. The participants in these groups believe they are entitled to sex with women, and therefore any rejection is interpreted as oppression against men. Contrary to PickUp Artists, Involuntary Celibates (who often started as PickUp Artists members) do not consider themselves as “alpha males”, but rather as shy men that, in their point-of-view, women avoid because of that (Lilly, 2016, pp. 49–50).
The categorization of the Manosphere into four main groups does not mean that these groups always have clear boundaries between them. After all, the actors of the Manosphere are usually members of more than one group, or they migrate from one to another (Horta Ribeiro et al., 2021, pp. 202–203). Moreover, there are often different points of view about certain aspects among the Manosphere groups—even competition between them. However, while the Manosphere is a heterogenous network, what seems to unite all its participants is “the common goal to defeat feminism or keep women out of the space” as well as to restore the male hegemony (Ging, 2017, p. 653).
Another category that can be traced in the Manosphere is the Red Pillers (Horta Ribeiro et al., 2021, p. 201), but at the same time, the framework of the “Red Pill” also serves as a general accepted narrative for all the members of the Manosphere. The concept of the “Red Pill” originates from the movie “The Matrix” (filmed in 1999), in which the protagonist must choose between the red pill and the blue pill. The former will allow the hero to learn the truth about the world, while the latter will maintain him in ignorance. The “Red Pill” for the Manosphere network is a metaphor for those men who “realized” what is “truly happening” in the world. That is, according to the Manosphere’s theory, that patriarchy is a myth and men are the ones being oppressed, not women (Kyparissiadis & Skoulas, 2021, p. 203). Thus, feminism is considered by the Manosphere’s actors as a suppressing system and theory, especially the second and third wave of feminism. Although the PickUp Artists groups oppose to any feminist idea, even to the suffragette movement of the first feminist wave (Lilly, 2016, pp. 37 and 92). According to the Manosphere, feminism (naming it “victim feminism”) aims for female domination rather than gender equality. To achieve this, it represents all women as victims and demonizes men and masculinity (Lilly, 2016, p. 91).
To understand more clearly what the Manosphere opposes to, it is important to briefly mention what these feminist theories stand for. Both second and third wave feminist theories do not support the female domination, but rather the deconstruction of gender stereotypes and the abolition of sexist social discrimination against women, which these gender stereotypes cause. For the second wave, biological sex and social gender (the way people embody roles and attitudes based on sex, the so-called masculinity and femininity) are not the one and the same. More specifically, devotees of second wave feminism, like Beauvoir, states that “One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman” (Beauvoir, 1979, p. 221), just as one becomes a man (Badinter, 1994, p. 13), through learning by various social agents (family, school, arts, etc.) (Beauvoir, 1979, pp. 306, 314) and various activities (games, sports, discourse, fashion, etc.) what roles and behaviors are accepted and expected from them. There is a social imaginary myth/model of Woman and Man, which material bodies/subjects must perform, confirm, and prove (Beauvoir, 1979, p. 279; Badinter, 1994, p. 18) to be (become) feminine women and masculine men (Bourdieu, 2019, p. 64). In addition, the queer feminist theory (third wave) states that both biological sex and gender are equally cultural constructs (Butler, 2009, pp. xvii, 31–32). Biological sex is commonly defined as the division of bodies into “male” and “female” based on the 23rd pair of chromosomes they possess, with those exhibiting the XX combination considered female/women and those with the XY combination male/men (Frangou, 2023, p. 12). Nevertheless, these combinations, as well as the assignment of “female” and “male” reproductive organs and hormones to them, are not always and clearly the condition observed in biology, as in some cases we have the existence of XXX or XO chromosome combinations, or XX with testicles and vice versa XY with a uterus, XX with higher percentages of testosterone, etc. (Fausto-Sterling, 2018; Frangou, 2023, p. 13). In other words, the notion of biological binary sex is not a self-evident truth and the division of people as male or female is not a necessity, but a social construction. Therefore, the gendered embodiment occurs even before our birth, when the doctor announces in the ultrasound “it’s a girl/it’s a boy” and thus begins the “girlification” and “boyification” of individuals, the interpellation, the definition of our identity and boundaries as such (Butler, 2008, pp. 51–52). These gendered embodiments produce (and are produced by) a cultural system (patriarchy) of gender inequality and hierarchy, where men are considered superior, ensuring them a variety of privileges, and women are underestimated and face violence and discriminations (in public sphere, politics, labor, economic sphere, personal relations, etc.).
Despite the achievements toward gender equality due to feminist movements, sexist discrimination and stereotypes still persist in many aspects of the social system. However, the Manosphere’s members support the notion that feminism has “gone too far” and is now unnecessary because gender equality has been accomplished, thus any further demands from women are conceived as “reverse sexism”. They also claim that feminism results in women’s unhappiness, as it leads them to be “single” and “childless” (Faludi, 2006, pp. 1–4; Lilly, 2016, p. 16). In other words, besides the fact that the Manosphere community disregards the ongoing sexist actions against women, they consider “reverse sexism” and source of unhappiness the contesting of male hegemony/supremacy and gender stereotypes.
In contrast to the feminist theory, the Manosphere’s actors believe that sex is an essentialist and determinist factor for people’s identity and behavior. In that sense, the Manosphere’s narrative reproduces traditional stereotypes and represents men (white and heterosexual mainly, as racism and homophobia are also present within the Manosphere) as logical, practical, productive, honorable, courageous, intelligent, strong, and with all sorts of positive qualities beings that are victimized and oppressed by women and feminists who do not appreciate and recognize their superior nature (Lilly, 2016, pp. 73–79). Meanwhile, at PickUp Artists community discourses, men have an inside hierarchy and are categorized as “alpha, beta or zeta males”. Alpha males are the superior men, beta are those who are weak and being suppressed by women, as they have not taken the red pill yet, and zeta are those who do not fit in the current system (Ging, 2017, p. 651). Modern women instead, especially western and feminist women, are depicted as problematic because they cannot fulfill their feminine role, being lovely wives and mothers, devoted to men, beautiful, and sweet (Lilly, 2016, p. 16). Simultaneously, however, a woman’s nature is represented as irrational, unfaithful, controlling, egoistic, etc. (Lilly, 2016, p. 53). Such contradictions about a “woman’s nature” can be spotted in many cases through the Manosphere’s narratives. For example, on the one hand, women are represented as weak, stupid and inferior and, on the other hand, as violent, manipulative, and abusive (Rothermel, 2023). Similarly, women are accused of being both “sluts” and “prude” (Lilly, 2016, p. 61). Moreover, a core aspect of misogynistic discourses within the Manosphere community is that women either lie about being raped and victims of gender violence to harm men by falsely accusing them, or that victims “deserved” to be raped and abused because of how they were behaving (Dickel & Evolvi, 2022). Considering all the above, an interesting element about the Manosphere’s gender theory is also the contradiction that even though it is believed that there is one true and inevitable “nature” of sex, modern society and gender roles are described as altered by the social theory and practice of feminism.
Another important aspect of the Manosphere, along with the worldviews that are represented, is the participants’ discursive choices. According to Rothermel (2023), the members of the Manosphere often present their views as indisputable “common knowledge” and they use as a discursive strategy the “evidence-based misogyny”. In other words, they “refer to (and misinterpret) knowledge in the form of statistics, studies, news items and pop-culture and mimic accepted methods of knowledge presentation to support their essentializing, polarizing views about gender relations in society”. Moreover, some participants of the Manosphere appropriate and portray inaccurately ancient Greek and Roman philosophical theories to support their position for male hegemony (Zuckerberg, 2018). Similarly, the Manosphere’s actors frequently mimic the language of liberation activism and revert these discourses to their advantage (Lilly, 2016, p. 90). On the other hand, the use of violent rhetoric is also a frequent and reoccurring phenomenon throughout the Manosphere (T. Farrell et al., 2019). In addition, a crucial element is the construction of slang terminology and neologisms by the Manosphere members (such as negging, zero night stand, Chad, red pill, blue pill, etc.) creating through the use of language a new collective subculture (T. Farrell et al., 2019; Ging, 2017; Kyparissiadis & Skoulas, 2021).
Lastly, an essential element to the Manosphere’s discourses, as well as its social impact, is the online environment in which the Manosphere exists and spreads. As stated previously, the Manosphere is a network of many digital media, such as websites, blogs, forums, social media, etc. The latter seems to play an important role on the Manosphere’s influence, not only because “Anyone today who does not intend to become a digital hermit is guaranteed to encounter these men online” (Zuckerberg, 2018, p. 3), but also because social media are considered to facilitate the diffusion of hate speech. Although social media are often (self-)presented as a way of the public sphere’s democratization (and at same level that could be true), there are many cases of online abuse, discrimination, and harassment through their use (Matamoros-Fernández & Farkas, 2021). Through the anonymity of many social media users, the physical distance, the weaponizing of memes, the linguistic violence, and the prevalence of a “tribal instinct us vs. them”, social media such as Facebook, X, and others have become a “digital communicative battleground” that can lead to group oppression (Pukallus & Arthur, 2024). Therefore, the research on social media discourses is crucial, especially for the Greek society, considering that the Greek audience, due to the lack of trust for the traditional media, is “increasingly relying on information from social media and the Internet” (Gioltzidou et al., 2024).
2. Materials and Methods
This article uses, as a corpus analysis, the posts (
Moreover, by considering the matter of the greater influence, it was evaluated that the research should examine the OΔΕΜ discourse on social media rather than its website. Τhe examination of the website’s founding text, which states the aim of the group, was an exception to facilitate the categorization of OΔΕΜ. The decision to focus on the Facebook page’s content was based on the understanding that a social media page can be seen and read by far more people, even those who are not actively seeking that specific content on Facebook. As described in the Introduction, Greek society very often uses social media for news information, meaning many people could be deceived by the Manosphere’s misinterpretation of historical facts, statistics, theories, etc. However, this interaction between OΔΕΜ and other Facebook users is not mapped by the research, as the comments of other users on the OΔΕΜ posts were not examined to prevent any violation of personal data. This research examines only the posts of the “Όχι, Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης” (OΔΕΜ) Facebook page, and more specifically the posts during January 2025, in order to have an adequate amount of content (several posts per day), as well as recent posts, to analyze and compare with the international phenomenon of the Manosphere.
To answer the research questions as they were stated in the Introduction (similar patterns with the international Manosphere, gendered identities, and roles representation), it was decided to follow a combination of thematic analysis and critical discourse analysis. Thematic analysis is a research method that is suited for the examination and classification of a large corpus, allowing us to discover thematic patterns and the relationship between concepts, as well as to compare data (Ibrahim, 2012). Using the thematic analysis method, it is possible to identify thematic categories inside the study material and to observe their appearance, frequency, as well as the absence of certain themes, which are all indicative elements for the interpretation and comprehension of a discourse (Psilla, 2010, pp. 46–48). This study examines in which thematic patterns the OΔΕΜ posts can be categorized, if these themes coincide with the international Manosphere topics of interest, as they are described by academic studies, and what subjects, news, facts, etc., that are relevant to the OΔΕΜ post themes are absent.
However, given that this study aims also to examine the representation of gendered identities and roles in these posts, in other words, the ideological function of discourse, it is preferable to also use the approach of critical discourse analysis. The critical discourse analysis focuses on the active role of discourse in the social construction of the world, as a social practice (among others) that creates meanings (Phillips & Jorgensen, 2009, p. 28). This analysis examines the linguistic characteristics of the texts (vocabulary, grammar, syntax, coherence, etc.), the intertextuality (what orders of discourse are being used, for example, medical discourse, feminist discourse, economic, etc.) as well as the social context in which the discourse is taking place (Phillips & Jorgensen, 2009, pp. 130–131; Fairclough, 2003, pp. 25, 34, 133, etc.). More specifically, this research examines what linguistic elements (terms, adjectives, similes, metaphors, etc.) have been made for the representation of gender, what orders of discourse can be identified, do they reproduce or restructure previous discourses and meanings, and how all these elements are interpreted in the broader social context.
3. Results
3.1. Main Themes of the OΔΕΜ (Όχι Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης) Facebook Page
3.1.1. Thematic Patterns
The founding text (About section) in the OΔΕΜ website (self-)identifies the page as “a refuge away from the unbearable whining of feminism”, which is accused as “puritanical and misandrist propaganda” and “terrorist climate”. Moreover, reference is made to inequality as “feminism’s double standards”, to “the male experience”, which is described as “the unseen torture of men”, to feminist “myths” regarding gender social roles and power relations, to a system of “misandry”, to “feminist absurdity”, and to the dangerous “landing” of feminism that threatens civil liberties and western societies. According to these thematic areas (patriarchy as a myth, oppressing feminism, victimization of men) the “Not, you are not a misogynist” website can be categorized as a case of the Men’s Rights Activists subculture, based on Lilly’s (2016) taxonomy for the Manosphere.
Regarding the morphological examination of the OΔΕΜ Facebook page, in January 2025, there were 99 posts with the majority being written texts about a social event, accompanied by a photo of the news coverage of that event, and with the relevant link provided in the comments section. However, 16 posts were only text without any photo, 7 were only a photo/meme without the original written text, and 14 posts followed the pattern of a written text accompanied by a photo, but did not address current social affairs.
By studying these 99 posts, nine main thematic patterns emerged: the misandrist/gynocentric system/culture, the attack on feminism and feminists, the male victims of violence/discrimination, the women perpetrators/abusive mothers, the targeting of women in public sphere, the positive representation of men, the model of a good woman, the racist comments, and the position against abortions. There is also one post of a positive representation of a heterosexual spousal relationship (30 January 2025, 8:24 p.m. time in Greece), one post that ridicules a man in public sphere (former USA president Biden, 5 January 2025, 8:13 p.m.), while two posts are not related to gender issues and cannot be categorized to the detected themes. One of them is a comment outside of context that cannot be safely interpreted (4 January 2025, 6:29 p.m.) and the other one is about advertisements (2 January 2025, 9:26 a.m.). In each of the 99 posts, more than one thematic pattern can usually be detected.
The most common subject within the OΔΕΜ posts is the misandrist/gynocentric system/culture, as it can be detected in 41 cases. It refers to social, political, legal, and cultural situations and “dominant” ideas that, according to OΔΕΜ, favor women, represent them always in a positive way, ensure them privileges, leave their illegal acts unpunished, and at the same time, victimize and stigmatize men, depict them as villains, and suppress them. For example, patriarchy, as well as gender-based violence and femicides, are always placed inside quotations marks, mocking and disputing their existence (4 January 2025, 2:27 p.m.; 10 January 2025, 1:14 p.m.; 12 January 2025, 8:34 a.m.; 14 January 2025, 11:10 a.m.; 27 January 2025, 10:31 a.m., and in many more cases), while there are direct statements for a gynocentric culture (22 January 2025, 11:54 a.m.), gynocentrism (19 January 2025, 4:27 p.m.; 20 January 2025, 5:01 p.m.) and Women country (19 January 2025, 4:27 p.m.). In these cases, most criticism is directed against the legal system which is represented as having double standards [women “have no consequences” while “according to the law any man could be prosecuted” just because he was passing by a woman who screamed (23 January 2025, 8:50 a.m.)], never punishing women who, allegedly, committed crimes [“she wasn’t hold in custody” (28 January 2025, 9:50 a.m.), “she is free” because “they are occupied with other matters…” (23 January 2025, 12:05 p.m.), “women murderers are free” (14 January 2025, 11:10 a.m.), etc.], and unfairly prosecuting men [“they violate the presumption of innocence (…) a man goes to prison because a woman claims that he said she was stupid” (19 January 2025, 4:27 p.m.), etc.]. According to the OΔΕΜ page, that kind of discrimination against men dominates legislative and executive power as well [“legislature supports fanatic misandrist positions” (22 January 2025, 8:37 a.m.), “they infringed fundamental rights of Greek men citizens” (20 January 2025, 5:01 p.m.), “while many men are victims of domestic violence (…) the government speaks about mythical ‘gender-based’ violence” (18 January 2025, 5:21 p.m.), etc.]. Moreover, the OΔΕΜ discourse pictures the social state as an “ideological little shop” that “its services are not for men” but are “given lavishly to women” (29 January 2025, 7:10 p.m.). Similarly, policies for gender equality and visibility are portraited as “deeply unconstitutional” (17 January 2025, 11:57 a.m.) and “men being excluded” (29 January 2025, 10:03 a.m.). Correspondingly, society is represented as tolerant to women’s acts of violence [“women discuss how they hit their boyfriends (…) and not a leaf is stirring” (26 January 2025, 10:20 a.m.), “people laugh” in front of a mother’s negligence (24 January 2025, 2:47 p.m.), etc.].
The second most detected theme (frequently combined with the previous) is the attack on feminism and feminists, found in 38 posts. In these cases, there are explicit references to feminism and feminist actors, who are being accused of undermining western culture and the democratic system, causing the moral decay of society, male belittlement and discriminations against men. Τhe language being used is extremely insulting and derisive. For example, feminism is described as “parasitic feminism” (30 January 2025, 11:26 a.m.), a “heretic dogma” (27 January 2025, 2:40 p.m.), a “regular coup” (20 January 2025, 5:01 p.m.), a “misandrist heresy” (19 January 2025, 4:27 p.m.) with “rotten feminist, misandrist point of view” (11 January 2025, 12:04 p.m.), etc. Feminism according to OΔΕΜ “caused crime and violence increase in Sweden” (24 January 2025, 6:36 p.m.), “stigmatizes the virtues of masculinity as toxic” (24 January 2025, 11:37 a.m.), whereas the “misinformation of the mitou” (as the MeToo movement scornfully is written) causes “the effects of the Mandela Syndrome” on society (6 January 2025, 11:47 a.m.). Similarly, in these posts, women feminist activists are derogated as “uneducated animals” that “belong to psychiatric hospital with heavy medication” (28 January 2025, 7:19 p.m.), “ideological parasites” (27 January 2025, 2:40 p.m.), “batshit crazy” and “narcissists” (24 January 2025, 2:47 p.m.), “little Goebbels” and “old rags” (23 January 2025, 5:29 p.m.), who “hate men” (22 January 2025, 6:32 p.m.) and “violate basic democratic principles” (9 January 2025, 6:00 p.m.), thereby comparing them to “Nazis” (25 January 2025, 11:32 a.m.), etc.
The third thematic pattern is that of the male victim of violence/discrimination, which is either caused by women or by the “misandrist” system. This pattern can be detected in 34 posts. For example, on 3 January 2025, 9:26 a.m., an unofficial record created by the OΔΕΜ page is published, regarding the “murders of men” and the “attempted murders by their female partners”. A recurring subject in other posts as well [e.g., “Multiple men are victims of domestic violence” (18 January 2025, 12:27 p.m.), “the year started well” referring sarcastically to the news about a man being attacked by his partner (1 January 2025, 11:21 a.m.), “how many men have gone missing” (14 January 2025, 11:10 a.m.), etc.]. Similarly, fathers are represented as victims of discrimination who are being kept away from their children [“the alienated father” (30 January 2025, 5:00 p.m.), “fathers haven’t seen their children in years” (9 January 2025, 9:00 a.m.), “another case of a father being alienated” (16 January 2025, 9:34 a.m.), etc.] and men in general being falsely accused or convicted without evidence [e.g., 3 January 2025, 1:50 p.m.; 16 January 2025, 9:34 a.m., and other cases], causing even their death (5 January 2025, 5:15 p.m.). Men, and only men, are also portraited as victims of workplace accidents [“countless men have shed their blood” but “nobody gives a damn” (10 January 2025, 9:30 a.m.), as well on 6 January 2025, 9:02 a.m., etc.].
On the other hand, the thematic pattern of the women perpetrators/abusive mothers is found in 26 posts. Women in these posts are represented as violent and merciless beings (mostly mothers against their children) or as manipulative and dishonest, falsely accusing men of domestic violence or rape. For example, there are references such as “she have been torturing her for ten years until she killed her” (meaning her child) (26 January 2025, 6:14 p.m.), “she almost killed the child” (24 January 2025, 2:47 p.m.), “they turn their violence against their own children and they murder them in extremely torturous ways for revenge” (22 January 2025, 11:54 a.m.), “she alienated the father” (16 January 2025, 9:34 a.m.), “she attacked on a policeman too (…) she lied (…) she tried to pull his eyes out” (15 January 2025, 8:59 a.m.), “a woman who was selling babies” (9 January 2025, 9:00 a.m.), “she was telling elaborate lies” and “she ruined so many men’s lives” (6 January 2025, 9:02 a.m.), “the first false accusation for the year” (4 January 2025, 10:38 a.m.), etc.
At this point, it is worth mentioning that some posts relating to women’s abusive behavior and men’s victimization are about the same incidents, but the OΔΕΜ page presents them as new cases (posts on 22 January 2025 and 26 January 2025, 6:14 p.m.; posts on 16 January 2025, 12:31 p.m., and 20 January 2025, 9:31 a.m.; posts on 11 January 2025, 6:37 p.m. and 15 January 2025, 6:52 p.m.; posts on 8 January 2025, 7:06 and 12 January 2025, 8:34 a.m.).
Another detected thematic pattern is the targeting of women in the public sphere, as it appears in 26 posts. Most often it concerns women stand-up comedians, since at that time many stand-up comedians had publicly criticized discrimination against women professionals in the industry, in light of a scheduled all-male show. In the end, the show was cancelled by the event organizers who admitted that the line-up selection was problematic. In the OΔΕΜ Facebook page, that incident is represented as bitterness revenge of “hysterical” and “untalented women” that “deprived men of their daily earnings” just because “they have a penis” (2025 January 2025, 11:32 a.m.). Similar insults, more or less, are made in other posts as well (21 January 2025, 1:42 p.m.; 21 January 2025, 5:15 p.m.; 24 January 2025, 9:48 a.m., etc.). Similarly, other posts are targeting female singers, influencers, tv hosts, actresses, foreign politicians, as well as G. Bika, a rape survivor who has spoken publicly about that incident. These women are insulted and represented in the posts as privileged, abusive, incapable as professionals, etc. (e.g., 3 January 2025, 12:44 p.m.; 10 January 2025, 1:14 p.m.; 13 January 2025, 10:23 a.m.; 22 January 2025, 8:37 a.m.; 26 January 2025, 10:20 a.m.; 27 January 2025, 2:40 p.m., etc.).
The thematic pattern of the positive representation of men and their virtues is detected in eight posts and the model of a “good” woman in seven posts, where there are narrations of specific female actors who appear to have positive personality characteristics (e.g., 6 January 2025, 9:02 a.m.; 24 January 2025, 11:37 a.m.; 25 January 2025, 5:50 p.m.; 30 January 2025, 3:16 p.m.; 31 January 2025, 11:11 a.m.; 31 January 2025, 1:52 p.m., and in others). The theme of racism is detected in four posts, for example, mocking of the live-action remake of the movie Ariel, in which the actress is black (18 January 2025, 5:21 p.m.), and a victim of violence because she chose as her boyfriend someone from Africa (10 January 2025, 7:34 p.m.). Similarly, an incident of a femicide does not seem to matter according to the OΔΕΜ point-of-view, as it concerned a woman and a man from Bulgaria (9 January 2025, 6 p.m.), while, in another post, it is implied that Ghana was better off under colonial occupation (10 January 2025, 1:14 p.m.). The last theme is the opposition to abortions and women’s reproductive rights, and it is detected in three posts (15 January 2025, 10:42 a.m.; 30 January 2025, 8:57 a.m.; and 30 January 2025, 11:26 a.m.).
Lastly, although it does not emerge as a main theme, it is crucial to underline that in four cases, there are mentions or implications of threats/encouragement to violence. On 8 January 2025, 10:04, the post refers to the infidelity of a woman influencer that “was ‘punished’ only with divorce”, implying that a more severe measure should probably have taken place. On 11 January 2025, 6:37 p.m., the post threatens a female journalist (without mentioning her name) that she is going to “be put to her place” and that “she will learn her place”. On 21 January 2025, 7:08 p.m., the post narrates the story of an anonymous “wounded” man (due to his divorce) who had thoughts “of doing something crazy”, for which there is no disapproval or discouragement in the post. Although the statement of “doing something crazy” could refer to self-harm, the lack of any mention of fear (of him harming himself) and the concept of “justifiable” femicides, as observed in a subsequent post, suggest that it could be a case of tolerance, at least, of violent acts against women. On 23 January 2025, 8:50 a.m., the post mentions, among other things, that “But if tomorrow she is found in a ditch, it would be ‘patriarchy’s’ fault, you fools, that commits femicides of the oppressed women”. In this case, the post not only mocks the phenomenon of femicides, but judges it as a justifiable act depending on a woman’s actions/behavior.
3.1.2. Absent Topics
Apart from the identified thematic patterns, the absence of certain, related topics is also important for drawing conclusions. In these 99 posts of January 2025, there is no mention of dating advice or heterosexual romantic and erotic relationships outside the legal perspective. Thus, although on 1 January 2025, 5:14 p.m. the post refers to “incels”, the Facebook page “No, you are not a misogynist” does not seem to be concerned with the main subjects of interest of PickUp Artists and Involuntary Celibates communities. The same applies to the relations of the OΔΕΜ Facebook page with the Men Going Their Own Way groups, as there is no suggestion of separatism, but rather a call for activism against feminism and policies promoting gender equality and visibility. These elements confirm the categorization of the OΔΕΜ Facebook page as a Men’s Rights Activists case.
Furthermore, the OΔΕΜ Facebook page is interested only in social topics related to gender (only one exception in 99 posts). Even when it refers to events with different key characteristics, the OΔΕΜ page focuses solely on the gender-based aspect or attempts to construct one. For example, in light of the demonstrations for the Greek national tragedy of the Tempi train crash, the OΔΕΜ page is only concerned about criticizing the slogan of a banner that, according to the Facebook page, belongs to feminist protesters. However, the banner is from an anarchist group, not a feminist one (27 January 2025, 10:31 a.m.).
Similar to other Men’s Rights Activists groups of the Manosphere, the OΔΕΜ page, in its effort to construct the social reality as an oppressive and abusive world to men, never publishes news about female victims of violence and children’s abuse by their father. Even in the case of the 12-year-old girl from Kolono, a victim of trafficking and multiple rapes, the post fails to mention the dozens of male perpetrators and refers only to a policewoman (who along with other policemen who allegedly provided protection to sex work-establishments), while the linked article describes a policeman’s involvement in the case (15 January 2025, 6:52 p.m.). Moreover, there is no mention of discriminations against women in the employment, legal and political sector, as well as there is no criticism of male actors in the private or public sphere, except for those who are characterized by OΔΕΜ as left-wing feminists (25 January 2025, 11:32 a.m.).
Considering all that, the “No, you are not a misogynist” Facebook page seems to operate as a think-tank of the Manosphere and an online activism against women and feminism, which is portrayed either as a misandrist theory and collective action that tries to undermine the rule of law and western culture, or as an already dominant perception and sexist system against men.
3.2. Gender Representations
3.2.1. Linguistic Characteristics
Before examining the gender representation in the OΔΕΜ discourse, it is important to mention some key general characteristics for the language being used. Although these 99 posts are written in Greek, many words contain both Greek and Latin characters. This differs from Greeklish, as only selected characters, not entire words, are in Latin script. For example, πατpiαpxiα (patriarchy, 2 January 2025, 3:15 p.m., etc.), φαei (eat, 31 January 2025, 5:2025 p.m.), βia (violence, 30 January 2025, 5 p.m.), and many other words. These may be either random typographical errors, or, more likely, a way to avoid Facebook’s algorithm limitations, as many posts contain swear words.
That is another key element of the language being used. Not only are women described and represented in a negative way, as will be analyzed afterwards, but they are also targets of direct insults in the OΔΕΜ discourse. For example, batshit crazy (3 January 2025, 1:50 p.m.; 15 January 2025, 10:42 a.m.; 24 January 2025, 2:47 p.m.), old rag (23 January 2025, 5:29 p.m.), junkie (23 January 2025, 8:50 a.m.; 23 January 2025, 12:05 p.m.), parasites (27 January 2025, 10:31 a.m.), sluts (6 January 2025, 9:12 p.m.), etc.
Moreover, many words in these posts are written in all capitals. For example, INNOCENT (15 January 2025, 6:52 p.m.), SO MUCH (…) LITERALLY (23 January 2025, 5:29 p.m.), NEVER (29 January 2025, 5:14 p.m.), ONCE MORE (31 January 2025, 1:52 p.m.), and in many other cases. This practice in the social media environment is considered as shouting and an aggressive form of communication.
Another main linguistic characteristic of the OΔΕΜ discourse is the frequent appearance of the rhetorical figure of irony, which is used to deride women and dispute feminist views or social events and facts. This irony is conveyed by using quotation marks around keywords of feminist discourse and through figures of exaggeration and antithesis. For example, as was noted previously, patriarchy, gender-based violence, and femicides are always in quotation marks (2 January 2025, 3:15 p.m.; 5 January 2025, 11:54 a.m.; 9 January 2025, 6 p.m.; 15 January 2025, 2:02 p.m.; 18 January 2025, 8:54 a.m.; 22 January 2025, 11:54 a.m.; 23 January 2025, 12:05 p.m.; 27 January 2025, 10:31 a.m., etc.). The same occurs for equality (24 January 2025, 6:36 p.m.), empowered (3 January 2025, 1:50 p.m.; 21 January 2025, 5:15 p.m.), misogynist (2 January 2025, 3:15 p.m.; 20 January 2025, 5:01 p.m.), glass ceiling (21 January 2025, 1:42 p.m.), etc. Similarly, there are many figures of exaggeration, such as “very very gendered ‘gender-based violence’” (28 January 2025, 9:50 a.m.), “patriarchally patriarchal ‘patriarchy’” (10 January 2025, 1:14 p.m.), “she is very very oppressed, so very very much” (3 January 2025, 12:44 p.m.), “she has a Nobel prize on internet psychograph” (13 January 2025, 10:23 a.m.), etc., as well as figures of antithesis. For example, for a workman that had offered his services without charge, the post sarcastically refers to him as “this toxic masculine man” (6 January 2025, 9:02 a.m.). Other posts begin with the phrase “in other patriarchal news” and move on to describing the events of some woman’s illegal activities (7 January 2025, 9:28 a.m.; 21 January 2025, 1:42 p.m.). Following the same logic, in other posts, there are oxymoronic phrases such as “she was selling babies because she is very oppressed” (9 January 2025, 9 p.m.), “she was torturing (…) she killed because violence is ‘gender-based’” (26 January 2025, 6:14 p.m.), “now they are oppressed by success too” (7 January 2025, 9:28 a.m.), etc. In general, when these 99 posts refer to a woman in a position of power, or to a woman who had exhibited abusive behavior, or to someone portrayed as privileged, they are ironically mentioned as “the oppressed” in the OΔΕΜ discourse (15 January 2025, 6:52 p.m.; 23 January 2025, 8:50 a.m.; 28 January 2025, 9:50 a.m.; 28 January 2025, 7:19 p.m., etc.).
Furthermore, in the OΔΕΜ posts, as in other discourses throughout the Manosphere, neologisms and linguistic corruptions can be detected. The word ακτιβισμός (activism) when referring to women’s activism is intentionally written as “ακτιβιζμός”, not only mocking feminist advocacy, but also, by altering the syllable βισ into βιζ, evoking the slang word βίζιτα, which means a paid visit to a sex-worker (29 January 2025, 10:03 a.m.). The same applies for the word βιασμός (rape) that it is written as “βιαζμός”, again mocking and evoking the word βίζιτα (3 January 2025, 1:50 p.m.). Similarly, woke culture/perspective is not translated in Greek but just written in Greek letters as “γουόκ” (in quotation marks as well), which is the same word for the wok pan in Greek (9 January 2025, 6 p.m.). As previously noted, the MeToo movement is also not translated and conveyed in Greek letters as “μυτού”, which evokes the word μύτη (nose), again for the purpose of ridicule (12 January 2025, 1:02 p.m.; 22 January 2025, 8:37 a.m.).
Focusing on gender representations in the OΔΕΜ discourse regarding women, the rhetorical technique of generalization is frequently noted. Based on an incident concerning a woman’s behavior, the discourse generalizes it by using the plural and attributing identity characteristics to all women. These characteristics are represented by using certain adjectives, verbs, metaphors, and descriptive phrases. Except for seven cases, women are constantly depicted in a negative way.
As stated previously, women in the OΔΕΜ discourse are often portrayed as abusive and violent persons [e.g., “These are the only things that unite them”, meaning death and violence (27 January 2025, 10:31 a.m.); “They are threatening” (18 January 2025, 12:27 p.m.); “murderers” (14 January 2025, 11:10 a.m.); “Harpies” (24 January 2025, 11:37 a.m.); “they hit their partners” (26 January 2025, 10:20 a.m.), etc.].
Another frequent identity characteristic, as constructed by the OΔΕΜ discourse, is that feminists and women in general are crazy, which is either stated by using relevant adjectives in plural [e.g., “delusional” (29 January 2025, 5:14 p.m.), “paranoid” (18 January 2025, 12:27 p.m.), “batshit crazy” (3 January 2025, 1:50 p.m.), etc.] or by the notable phrase “their only place is inside a psychiatric hospital with heavy medication” (15 January 2025, 10:42 a.m.; 18 January 2025, 12:27 p.m.; 22 January 2025, 8:37 a.m.; 28 January 2025, 7:19 p.m.).
Similarly, women are described as “hysterical”, who are “screaming”, “having a meltdown”, and are “enraged” (e.g., 2 January 2025, 3:15 p.m.; 12 January 2025, 8:34 a.m.; 23 January 2025, 8:50 a.m.; 23 January 2025, 12:05 p.m.; 24 January 2025, 2:47 p.m.; 29 January 2025, 5:14 p.m., etc.). They are portrayed also as “whiny” either with the use of such adjective (e.g., 19 January 2025, 6:45 p.m.; 24 January 2025, 9:48 a.m.) or with exaggeration figures, such as “titanic levels of whining” (21 January 2025, 5:15 p.m.), “galactic-level whining” (21 January 2025, 1:42 p.m.), etc.
In the OΔΕΜ discourse, it is also implied that women are dishonest as they are accused that “they are defaming” (18 January 2025, 12:27 p.m.), they often make “false accusations” (3 January 2025, 9:26 a.m.; 6 January 2025, 11:47 a.m.; 9 January 2025, 9 a.m.; 23 January 2025, 8:50 a.m., etc.), and in general, that they act as oppressed when this is not the case according to OΔΕΜ (for examples see above).
Women are also represented as manipulative [“they are instrumentalizing even the incident of the Tempi train crash” (27 January 2025, 10:31 a.m.), “they alienate the father” (9 January 2025, 11:20 a.m.; 16 January 2025, 9:34 a.m., etc.)], narcissists (24 January 2025, 2:47 p.m.) that cannot handle rejection (22 January 2025, 11:54 a.m.), toxic (24 January 2025, 2:47 p.m.; 31 January 2025, 8:47 a.m.), cowards (27 January 2025, 2:40 p.m.), ungrateful (10 January 2025, 9:30 a.m.), and lazy (6 January 2025, 9:12 p.m.).
Women’s social role is also underestimated and ridiculed in the OΔΕΜ discourse. However, simultaneously, they are depicted as the most privileged social group in modern western societies. Women are characterized in these posts as “ultra-privileged” and “spoiled” (29 January 2025, 5:14 p.m.), as there is “unfair competition” that works in their favor (20 January 2025, 1:42 p.m.), they are enjoying “social services that are given lavishly to women” (29 January 2025, 7:10 p.m.), and they are given preferential treatment by the criminal justice system (28 January 2025, 9:50 a.m.; 23 January 2025, 12:05 p.m.; 14 January 2025, 11:10 a.m., etc.).
According to the OΔΕΜ perspective, this is happening because society holds a positive bias towards women [the OΔΕΜ states that they are considered as “magical creatures” (4 January 2025, 5:10 p.m.), “innocent by default” (11 January 2025, 8:52 a.m.), a priori “victims” (24 January 2025, 2:47 p.m.)], leading to a lack of meritocracy, where women are employed or promoted “just because they are women” (10 January 2025, 1:14 p.m.; 11 January 2025, 12:04 p.m.). The OΔΕΜ argument for favoritism is accompanied by insults to women’s capability [“incompetent” (2 January 2025, 3:15 p.m.), “useless” (10 January 2025, 1:14 p.m.), “they don’t know even the basics” (10 January 2025, 9:30 a.m.), “untalented” (19 January 2025, 6:45 p.m.; 25 January 2025, 11:32 a.m., etc.), they cannot handle “conversations for serious matters”; therefore, they “better discuss about your cosmetics” (13 January 2025, 10:23 a.m.)].
Moreover, professional women are referred to in a derisive way, with the profession’s word endings deliberately misspelled. For example, instead of the correct grammar of μηχανικός (engineer), πρωθυπουργός (president), επιστήμονες (scientist), δημοσιογράφος (journalist), πυροσβέστρια (firefighter), etc., they are mentioned as μηχανικίνα, πρωθυπουργίνα, επιστημονιδίνες, δημοσιογραφίνα, πυροσβεστίνα (10 January 2025, 1:14 p.m.; 3 January 2025, 12:44 p.m.; 11 January 2025, 6:37 p.m., etc.). By using the suffix -ινα for women in professional positions, the OΔΕΜ Facebook page mocks the feminist attempt to make women’s presence in certain professions visible in language (in Greek, despite the rules of grammar regarding gender suffixes, the exclusive use of the masculine form is socially dominant when referring to professions with social prestige and power). However, -ινα is not the correct female suffix for these professions either and it is frequently used to belittle women’s presence in these fields of work, evoking the word θεατρίνα, which means someone who acts like she is someone else (is a derogatory word for “actress”). Lastly, on 9 January 2025, 6 p.m., the OΔΕΜ post objectifies women by stating that “their uses are very specific and limited”, referring to the traditional gender stereotypes of reproductive and nurturing role of women. This can be deduced from the broader context and the characteristics attributed to women who are represented positively by the OΔΕΜ discourse, as they are described below.
In the seven cases when a woman is depicted in a positive way, these qualities are not generalized as embodied by all women. Instead, these “wonderful” women are represented as the exception to the rule, serving as role models. The characteristics presumed as good qualities for a woman in the OΔΕΜ discourse are domestic skills [e.g., “she has right judgment (…) she is taking care of her houseguests” (6 January 2025, 9:12 p.m.), “she had everything in the house in perfect order (…) she cooked for an army” (7 January 2025, 3:49 p.m.)], kindness (25 January 2025, 5:50 p.m.), helpfulness and humility, as demonstrated by the story of a psychologist who helped without charge men in need and sought no acknowledgement for her selfless act (31 January 2025, 1:52 p.m.). It is worth mentioning that in this case, the woman’s profession is written correctly, and she is addressed as “Lady”. In the OΔΕΜ discourse, women seem to be respected only if they are “rock of patience, nurture, empathy and love”, as a fictional female character is represented (24 January 2025, 11:37 a.m.), and those who understand that women are “emotionally manipulative towards men”, as the OΔΕΜ misrepresents Jane Austen, referring to her as anti-feminist (6 January 2025, 6:46 p.m.).
On the other hand, regarding the male representation in the OΔΕΜ discourse, men are portrayed in a sympathetic way, with positive meaning adjectives and verbs, except for those who are considered as feminists and are described as “castrated” by women (24 January 2025, 9:48 a.m.) and “morally weak” (25 January 2025, 11:32 a.m.). As previously noted, most posts emphasize the victimization of men by women, feminism, and the current system. Passive voice is often used to underline that detrimental events are happening to men, and they are not causing or have responsibility for those [e.g., “they are being threatened” (18 January 2025, 12:27 p.m.), “another case of a father being alienated” (16 January 2025, 9:34 a.m.), “so many men have been chased and humiliated” (6 January 2025, 11:47 a.m.), etc.]. Thus, this victimization is not attributed to men’s gender identity, but rather to the maliciousness of women and the system’s injustice which prohibits men from fighting back [e.g., “if he tried to defend himself, he would be found in trouble” (23 January 2025, 8:50 a.m.), etc.].
Usually, references to men’s qualities in the OΔΕΜ discourse are ascribed to all men in general and not to a specific person. Men are represented as sentimental and caring (30 January 2025, 3:16 p.m.), “supportive”, “authentic”, and “genuinely brave” (21 January 2025, 7:08 p.m.). The “epitome of masculinity”, as the OΔΕΜ post states, is considered a fictional male character that was “beautiful, poor man who lost everything in war, in which he fought, and tries to rebuild everything from the beginning” (11 January 2025, 8:52 a.m.). After all, men’s social role is constructed as performing a “sacred and god-pleasing purpose”, which is to act as “society’s shield” and to “sacrifice” themselves to “protect women and children” and humankind in general (24 January 2025, 11:37 a.m.). Men are considered in the OΔΕΜ discourse not only as “hard-working” (2 5January 2025, 11:32 a.m.) and socially useful, as they have built all the infrastructures and “have shed their blood for that” (10 January 2025, 9:30 a.m.; 29 January 2025, 5:14 p.m.), but also as founders of the civilization [“women are enjoying our civilization” (10 January 2025, 9:30 a.m.)]. Even though the reproductive role for men, contrary to women, is not described or implied as a main purpose, men are always represented as good fathers [“there is a special bond between father and son (…) “the amount of father’s love for his son” (24 January 2025, 11:37 a.m.), etc.].
3.2.2. Orders of Discourse
Most of the OΔΕΜ posts are daily-based discourse with many slang and insulting elements (e.g., 3 January 2025, 1:50 p.m.; 15 January 2025, 10:42 a.m.; 23 January 2025, 5:29 p.m.; 27 January 2025, 10:31 a.m., etc.), combined with discursive features from the news media space, as in 62 cases the posts are about the coverage of a social event that occurred. Nonetheless, the OΔΕΜ posts follow the style of the social media environment and there is often direct address to the page’s followers, usually with the sarcastic phrase “you fools” (19 January 2025, 4:27 p.m.; 21 January 2025, 1:42 p.m.; 21 January 2025, 5:15 p.m.; 30 January 2025, 8:57 a.m., etc.) or memes (10 January 2025, 4:17 p.m.; 15 January 2025, 2:02 p.m.; 16 January 2025, 5:40 p.m., and in other cases).
Moreover, other orders of discourse can be detected in the posts, such as legal arguments and terms from the legal justice and constitutional system (e.g., 7 January 2025, 3:49 p.m.; 17 January 2025, 11:57 a.m.; 20 January 2025, 5:01 p.m.; 27 January 2025, 10:31 a.m., etc.), political statements for the democratic system or against the Left and the government (e.g., 18 January 2025, 12:27 p.m.; 21 January 2025, 1:42 p.m.; 25 January 2025, 11:32 a.m., etc.), the term “parental alienation”, which is a key feature in the Movement of the Fathers discourse (e.g., 4 January 2025, 10:38 a.m.; 9 January 2025, 9 a.m.; 16 January 2025, 9:34 a.m.; 28 January 2025, 7:19 p.m., and in many others posts). In some cases, there is also narrative speech (6 January 2025, 11:47 a.m.; 24 January 2025, 11:37 a.m.; 25 January 2025, 5:50 p.m., etc.), passages of literature (6 January 2025, 6:46 p.m.; 11 January 2025, 8:52 a.m.), religious and historical discourse (24 January 2025, 11:37 a.m.; 11 January 2025, 8:52 a.m., etc.).
Through the variety of different kinds of discourse that are combined (and weaponized against feminism and women) in the OΔΕΜ posts, the activist/accusatory discursive style and the appropriation of feminist discourse are considered by this study as the most interesting elements.
While in many posts a commentary description of a social event is taking place, in some others there is a direct call to the OΔΕΜ followers and men in general to awaken and resist against (of what is presumed as) feminist and systemic injustice. For example, “you haven’t realized yet how society has become because of these lunatics (…) you are in denial” (3 January 2025, 1:50 p.m.), “you have consented to the acceptance of this bottomless madness” (19 January 2025, 4:27 p.m.), “Let your gynocentrism and political stubbornness aside and speak up about this matter while we still have time” (20 January 2025, 5:01 p.m.), “Congratulations, this is what they’ve reduced you to” (23 January 2025, 8:50 a.m.), etc.
Furthermore, although in most posts there are accusations against women and feminism and the OΔΕΜ discourse can be identified as misogynistic and anti-feminist, in many cases, the OΔΕΜ appropriates feminist discursive manner and utilizes it to portray the male experience, reversing the feminist arguments and the traditional gender representation. Apart from all the examples that were previously noted for the violence of women against men, in the OΔΕΜ discourse there are arguments and terms such as “they find everything prepared from men (…) without so much as a thank you” (10 January 2025, 9:30 a.m.), “When will the violence unrecognized by the state cease?” (16 January 2025, 12:31 p.m.), “toxicity” (19 January 2025, 4:27 p.m.), “love this solidarity towards male trauma (…) You are not alone” (21 January 2025, 7:08 p.m.), “double standards” (21 January 2025, 5:15 p.m.), “sexism” (21 January 2025, 1:42 p.m.), “toxic mother” (24 January 2025, 2:47 p.m.), etc.
3.2.3. Broader Social Context
The OΔΕΜ discourse constructs a social reality in which women, despite the inherent flawed characteristics attributed to them, are the most privileged social group, because feminism, which OΔΕΜ represents as a movement for female dominance and not gender equality, has prevailed, or is on the verge of doing so. Thus, in the OΔΕΜ worldview, the social, political, and legal system is controlled by and for women. On the other hand, men are represented as historically wronged and oppressed by women and the system, despite sacrificing their lives for the safety and advancement of society, for which they are not acknowledged. In other words, the OΔΕΜ page endorses an essentialist conception of gender and reproduces the traditional gendered stereotypes about men and women, but with one crucial difference. In the OΔΕΜ discourse, women are the violent and ruthless ones who are in power, and men are their victims.
To reverse the reality in this manner and portray women as the socially dominant group and men as the disadvantaged, the OΔΕΜ represents events isolated from the wider social context, while constantly distorting, concealing, omitting, and even fabricating false facts.
For example, the OΔΕΜ page very often posts about male victims of domestic violence, essentially claiming that domestic violence is equally affecting men and women, or even more men than women. However, the OΔΕΜ page never publishes similar news about female victims of domestic violence, who constitute the majority of the cases. According to the Greek Police official records for 2023, 9886 women and 3456 men were victims of domestic violence, and 9937 men and 2284 women were the perpetrators of domestic violence (Hellenic Police Headquarters, 2024, pp. 101, 103). Simultaneously, the unofficial record for 2024 that OΔΕΜ created and presents on 3 January 2025, 9:26 a.m., for the male victims of murders or attempted murders by their partners/family, the abusive mothers and the false accusations, it distorts the facts given in the links provided by the OΔΕΜ page. For example, one of the murders was committed by male perpetrators, one of the “attempted murders” was a spousal fight where both parties committed violent acts, and as for the 49 cases of “false accusation”, four cases are about the same incident, two are older cases, two accusations were withdrawn due to the psychological damage suffered by the victim during the process, in one incident the case was filed and in another one the false accusation was against a woman, not a man, contrary to what the post implies. Lastly, 13 cases are misrepresented as a false accusation because there was either a partial conviction, or an acquittal due to reasonable doubt. Similar distortions of the news coverage about “false accusations” are detected in other posts as well (e.g., 4 January 2025, 10:38 a.m.; 7 January 2025, 1:36 p.m.; 22 January 2025, 6:32 p.m., etc.).
Most importantly, the OΔΕΜ page deliberately confuses the notion of gender-based violence with every act of violence. In the OΔΕΜ reasoning for the argument against the existence of gender-based violence, it appears to be the fact that women also commit violent acts against men. However, the notion of gender-based violence does not support that every violent incident with a female victim is a case of gender-based violence. Instead, it refers to the motives behind these acts. Gender-based violence is the violence inflicted on someone based on the perception that the victims “deserve” what they suffer due to their gender identity/expression. Concurrently, OΔΕΜ misrepresents feminism and feminist activists as endorsing violence against men (e.g., 3 January 2025, 1:50 p.m.; 24 January 2025, 2:47 p.m.), when there are no facts or events to support this accusation. As a matter of fact, on 6 January 2025, 9:02 a.m., when the OΔΕΜ page narrates the story of a false rape accusation that resulted in violent acts against the alleged perpetrators, the post blames feminist activists for these actions. However, in reality, these attacks were carried out by extreme-right groups, as the linked news coverage describes.
Similarly, OΔΕΜ argues that more children are being abused by their mothers, without providing any relevant statistical research (30 January 2025, 5 p.m.). According to The Smile of the Child, Greek Non-Governmental Organization, most recent data (2022), in most cases of child abuse in Greece, both parents were the perpetrators (The Smile of the Child, 2023). Moreover, in many posts about child abuse by mothers, the participation of (step)fathers in these acts is constantly concealed, despite the facts given in the links provided by the OΔΕΜ page (e.g., 18 January 2025, 8:54 a.m.; 26 January 2025, 6:14 p.m.; 30 January 2025, 5 p.m., etc.). Regarding the “parental alienation”, which the OΔΕΜ page portrays as an estrangement between father and child caused by mothers, with detrimental effects on psychological health, the World Health Organization states that “During the development of ICD-11, a decision was made not to include the concept and terminology of ‘parental alienation’ in the classification, because it is not a health care term” (World Health Organization, 2020).
OΔΕΜ also mentions very often the “attack” on civil rights and liberties of men citizens by feminism, referring and linking to announcements from legal associations regarding the latest changes to the law about domestic violence (e.g., 9 January 2025, 6 p.m.; 17 January 2025, 11:57 a.m.; 18 January 2025, 12:27 p.m., etc.). However, the OΔΕΜ Facebook page again distorts the facts of the provided links, as the legal associations’ criticism against the new legislation refers to all peoples’ rights—the law does not mention a specific gender in its regulations after all. Moreover, OΔΕΜ conceals the parts of the announcements which mention that more effort should be made to protect women from gender-based violence. The legal associations’ criticism was against the government and not feminism, as it is misrepresented in the OΔΕΜ discourse.
Following the same pattern, the OΔΕΜ page constructs a reality where gender equality is dominant in the work sector, concealing the gender pay gap, incidents of harassment and discrimination towards women, as mentioned, for example, by a stand-up comedian in the link provided by OΔΕΜ (and whose words the OΔΕΜ page twists) (21 January 2025, 1:42 p.m.). Moreover, OΔΕΜ represents workplace accidents as a situation that concerns only male workers, attributing these accidents to their gender rather than to the hazardous nature of certain jobs, contrary to what is described in the relevant link (29 January 2025, 5:14 p.m.). Similarly, by publishing posts only about women in high political positions and solely about their questionable decisions/actions, the OΔΕΜ page attempts to conceal the fact that women in positions of political power are still significantly fewer than men and implies that their criticized political actions are due to their gender (e.g., 3 January 2025, 12:44 p.m.; 10 January 2025, 1:14 p.m.). In general, the OΔΕΜ discourse perceives gender as the only explanatory cause for every incident, disregarding any other social factor (e.g., social class, corruption, wealth, etc.), creating a self-evident, closed system of reasoning, in which women are essentially bad, and men are essentially good, and every event is examined based on this axiom.
4. Discussion and Conclusions
This study researched the Greek Manosphere by examining the case of the “Όχι, Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης” (OΔΕΜ) (No, you are not a misogynist) Facebook Page through thematic analysis and critical discourse analysis, to ascertain whether it follows the same patterns of the international Manosphere groups and how gendered identities and roles are represented in its discourse.
By analyzing the founding text (About section) from the blog/website “Όχι, Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης”, it was found that the page belongs to the Men’s Rights Activists subculture of the Manosphere, according to Lilly’s (2016) taxonomy. By examining the 99 Facebook posts from January 2025, it was ascertained that the “Όχι, Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης” Facebook page reproduces the same patterns of the Men’s Rights Activists groups, as they have been presented by relevant studies for the Manosphere. OΔΕΜ conducts an online activism against feminism, which is mispresented as female domination and attack on western democracy and civil rights. The Facebook page propagates hate speech against women and feminists, along with racist comments, by using derisive and insulting language and targeting famous women in the public sphere. Moreover, in four cases, the implication of threat and tolerance/encouragement to violence against women is noted.
Even though the Facebook page does not mention the “Red Pill” metaphor, its notion seems to dominate the OΔΕΜ discourse. The “Όχι, Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης” Facebook page represents men as essentially good due to their gender. More precisely, as caring figures, brave, hard-working, capable, good fathers, founders and protectors of western civilization and society; however, mistreated, unappreciated and oppressed by women, feminism and the social, legal and political system. Thus, the page calls its followers, and men in general, to awaken and resist this situation.
On the other hand, women, and especially feminists, within the OΔΕΜ discourse are represented as highly socially appreciated, though crazy, incapable, privileged, lazy, arrogant, whiny, liars, abusive and violent, meant only for reproductive and nurturing roles. There are only seven cases in which a particular woman is depicted in a positive way due to characteristics of patience, nurturing, humility, devotion to family, pleasantness and helpfulness, as attributed by OΔΕΜ.
Although the OΔΕΜ Facebook page reproduces traditional gender stereotypes and representations, a crucial difference from “classic” patriarchal perceptions is that the OΔΕΜ discourse, similar to the international Manosphere groups, portrays women as privileged, socially dominant and violent towards men and children, while men are depicted as victims, discriminated by women and the social system in general. This inversion of reality is executed by means of distortion, obfuscation, falsification, and the creation of false data by the OΔΕΜ discourse. Additionally, the OΔΕΜ Facebook page to support the perception of men’s oppression and women’s dominance, utilizes a variety of different orders of discourse (legal, statistical, political, news media, literature), with key characteristics the appropriation of activist and feminist discourse.
Considering that gender equality in western societies has improved, but is not yet fully achieved, the misinterpretation of facts, victimization, and the mimicking of liberating causes by OΔΕΜ, and the Manosphere in general, could lead to latent, or overt, misogynist perception and stereotypes (re)gaining popularity, as well as to the misleading of many social media users.
This study contributes to the research of the Manosphere network by examining the phenomenon in the Greek digital space and, specifically, the case of the popular, anonymous, and public accessed Facebook page of “Όχι, Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης” (No, you are not a misogynist). However, due to the influence and expansion of the Manosphere, more research is needed to map and analyze the phenomenon on the Greek web and its consequences for gender equality, the use of social media, and the formation of the public sphere and public discourse.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
“Όχι Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης” (No, you are not a misogynist) Facebook Page:
The author declares no conflicts of interest.
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
| Fb page | Facebook page |
| Incels | Involuntary Celibates |
| OΔΕΜ | Όχι Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης (No, you are not a misogynist) |
| ΣΥ.ΓA.ΠA. | ΣΥλλογος Για την Aνδρική και Πατρική Aξιοπρέπεια (Club for the Male and Paternal Dignity) |
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Badinter, E. ΧΥ I andriki taftotita [XY The male identity]; Katoptro: 1994.
Beauvoir, S. To deftero fylo [The second sex]; Glaros: 1979.
Bourdieu, P. I andriki kyriarhia [The male domination]; Pataki: 2019.
Butler, J. Somata me simasia [Bodies that matter]; Ekkremes: 2008.
Butler, J. Anatarahi fylou. O feminismos kai i anatropi tis taftotitas [Gender trouble. Feminism and the subversion of identity]; Alexandria: 2009.
Club for the male and paternal dignity [ΣΥλλογος Για την Aνδρική και Πατρική Aξιοπρέπεια]; 2025; Available online: http://www.sos-sygapa.eu/ (accessed on 16 February 2025).
Dickel, V.; Evolvi, G. “Victims of feminism”: Exploring networked misogyny and #MeToo in the manosphere. Feminist Media Studies; 2022; 23,
Fairclough, N. Analysing discourse. Textual analysis for social research; Routledge: 2003.
Faludi, S. Backlash: The undeclared war against American women (15th anniversary); Three Rivers Press: 2006.
Farrell, T.; Fernandez, M.; Novotny, J.; Alani, H. Exploring misogyny across the manosphere in reddit. WebSci ‘19 Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Web Science; Boston, MA, USA, June 30–July 3; 2019; pp. 87-96. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3292522.3326045]
Farrell, W. The myth of male power; Berkeley Publishing Group: 1993.
Fausto-Sterling, A. Why sex is not binary. The New York Times; 25 October 2018; Available online: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/2025/opinion/sex-biology-binary.html?fbclid=IwAR3ULgF-lKx63Ap8SLgQKYU0asAdE53vW_ONtcOtJYSAyXvqTZZ-yJICgM8 (accessed on 18 February 2025).
Frangou, A. I pali gia tin trans apelefterosi [The struggle for trans liberation]; Marxistiko Vivliopolio: 2023.
Galanopoulou, C. Explainer: Telika, egine diadilosi (!) gia ton Andrew Tate stin Athina? [Explainer: Did a protest happen for Andrew Tate in Athens?]. Lifo; 18 January 2023; Available online: https://www.lifo.gr/stiles/optiki-gonia/explainer-telika-egine-diadilosi-gia-ton-andrew-tate-stin-athina (accessed on 16 February 2025).
GentlemenOnly. 2025; Available online: https://gentlemenonly.gr/ (accessed on 16 February 2025).
Ging, D. Alphas, betas, and incels: Theorizing the masculinities of the manosphere. Men and Masculinities; 2017; 22,
Gioltzidou, G.; Mitka, D.; Gioltzidou, F.; Chrysafis, T.; Mylona, I.; Amanatidis, D. Adapting Traditional Media to the Social Media Culture: A Case Study of Greece. Journalism and Media; 2024; 5,
Greek Red Pillers—Λογικοί Άνδρες. 2025; Available online: https://www.facebook.com/groups/greekredpillers (accessed on 16 February 2025).
Harkiolakis, T. Challenging the social order of a patriarchy through social media activism: The case of the Greek #MeToo movement. The European Conference on Arts & Humanities 2023: Official Conference Proceedings; London, UK, July 13–17; 2023; pp. 113-118. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.22492/issn.2188-1111.2023.11]
Hellenic Police Headquarters. Etisia ekthesi apologismou ergou iperesion adimetopisis endoikogeniakis vias etous 2023 [Annual report of the domestic violence services project for the year 2023]; 2024; Available online: https://www.astynomia.gr/file/2024/07/%CE%94%CE%95%CE%99%CE%9A%CE%A4%CE%97%CE%A3-1.pdf (accessed on 4 March 2025).
Horta Ribeiro, M.; Blackburn, J.; Bradlyn, B.; De Cristofaro, E.; Stringhini, G.; Long, S.; Greenberg, S.; Zannettou, S. The Evolution of the manosphere across the web. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media; 2021; 15,
Ibrahim, A. M. Thematic analysis: A critical review of its process and evaluation. West East Journal of Social Sciences; 2012; 1,
Kalaitzidis, C. O Theos Aglorithmos kai i skotini kardia tou manosphere [The god algorithm and the dark heart of the Manosphere]. Lifo; 15 January 2024; Available online: https://www.lifo.gr/stiles/optiki-gonia/o-theos-algorithmos-kai-i-skoteini-kardia-toy-manosphere (accessed on 16 February 2025).
Kyparissiadis, G.; Skoulas, E. Manosphere and manconomy: Divergent masculinities in the digital space. Ex-Centric Narratives: Journal of Anglophone Literature, Culture and Media; 2021; 5, pp. 199-217. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.26262/exna.v0i5.8501]
Lifo Newsroom. Ti simeni, telika, o oros «incel»? [What does it mean, after all, the term “incel”?]; 2023; Available online: https://www.lifo.gr/now/tech-science/ti-simainei-telika-o-oros-incel (accessed on 16 February 2025).
Lilly, M. The world is not a safe place for men: The representational politics of the manosphere. Ph.D. thesis; University of Ottawa: 2016; Available online: https://ruor.uottawa.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/1eee5112-7f22-4ffc-a49d-a978a56bed05/content (accessed on 10 February 2025).
Matamoros-Fernández, A.; Farkas, J. Racism, hate speech, and social media: A systematic review and critique. Television & New Media; 2021; 22,
No, you are not a misogynist [Όχι Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης—Oxi Den Eisai Misoginis]; n.d.-a; Available online: https://odem.gr/category/liga-logia/ (accessed on 16 February 2025).
No, you are not a misogynist [Όχι Δεν Είσαι Μισογύνης—Oxi Den Eisai Misoginis]; n.d.-b; Facebook page Available online: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100083054061486 (accessed on 16 February 2025).
Phillips, L.; Jorgensen, M. W. Analisi logou. Theoria kai Methodos [Discourse analysis as theory and method]; Papazisis: 2009.
Psilla, M. Methodologia tis analisis enos gegonotos apo ton entipo tipo [Methodology of Event Analysis from Print Media]; Tipothito: 2010.
Pukallus, S.; Arthur, C. Combating hate speech on social media: Applying targeted regulation, developing civil-communicative skills and utilising local evidence-based anti-hate speech interventions. Journalism and Media; 2024; 5,
Rothermel, A.-K. The role of evidence-based misogyny in antifeminist online communities of the ‘manosphere’. Big Data & Society; 2023; 10,
The Lifo Team. Pos I sixroni andres ekpedevode na misoun tis ginekes [How modern men are training to hate women]; 2023; Available online: https://www.lifo.gr/apopseis/idees/pos-oi-syghronoi-andres-ekpaideyontai-na-misoyn-tis-gynaikes (accessed on 16 February 2025).
The Smile of the Child. Anafores se eisaggelikes kai astynomikes arxes gia paidia se kindyno. Panelladika Statistica Stoixeia 2022 [Reports to prosecutor’s and police authorities about chindren in danger. Nationwide Greek Statistics]; 2023; Available online: https://www.hamogelo.gr/media/uploads_file/2023/01/19/p1gn5moohu1uql4k41fjq1dc81tdt3b.pdf (accessed on 20 February 2025).
World Health Organization. Parental alienation; 2020; Available online: https://www.who.int/standards/classifications/frequently-asked-questions/parental-alienation (accessed on 20 February 2025).
Zuckerberg, D. Not all dead white men: Classics and misogyny in the digital age; Harvard University Press: 2018.
© 2025 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.