Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics and Society
Vol. 14:6 (2023) ► pp.844–868

Self-help and masculinity

Speech acts in an online men’s group

ORCID logo | Birmingham City University,
This study investigates the interactional norms of a manosphere discussion forum known as The Red Pill (TRP), and asks whether it can be conceptualised as a self-help group. 2104 posts and comments from regular users and high-status users in the community were analysed qualitatively to determine how the community is characterised by certain speech acts, and how these speech acts correspond to face-enhancement and face-threat as well as to certain impression management strategies.
Since personal disclosure, advice-giving, and face-enhancement are key characteristics of TRP, it could be argued that TRP shares some functional characteristics with self-help communities. However, much of the advice given is unsolicited, a disproportionately high rate of face-enhancement is directed towards high-status users, and speech acts such as elaborating, and some advice-giving and personal disclosure seem to be used for self-promotion purposes. Furthermore, the prevalence of unhedged face-threats sets TRP apart from traditional supportive communities.
Keywords: impression management, manosphere, masculinity, relational work, self-help, speech acts
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Men, self-help, and self-disclosure
    • 2.1TRP
  • 3.Data selection, collection and preparation
  • 4.Methodology
  • 5.Results and discussion
    • 5.1Face-enhancing and face-threatening speech acts
    • 5.2Other speech acts
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 11 April 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.21075.kre
References (35)
References
Anderson, Benedict. 1983. Imagined Communities. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Altman, Irwin and Dalmas Taylor. 1973. Social Penetration: The Development of Interpersonal Relationships. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Bowman-Grieve, Lorraine. 2009. “Exploring “Stormfront”: A Virtual Community of the Radical Right.” Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 32(11): 989–1007. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coates, Jennifer. 2003. Men Talk: Stories in the Making of Masculinities. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan. 2011. Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dayter, Daria, and Sofia Rüdiger. 2016. “Reporting from the Field: the Narrative Reconstruction of Experience in Pick-Up Artist Online Communities.” Open Linguistics 2(1): 337–351. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dishy, Aaron. 2018. “Swallowing Misandry: A Survey of the Discursive Strategies of r/TheRedPill on Reddit.” MA diss., Toronto University.
Eckert, Penelope, and Sally McConnell-Ginet. 1992. “Think Practically and Look Locally: Language and Gender as Community-Based Practice.” Annual Review of Anthropology 21 ( 1 ): 461–490. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
franzke, aline shakti, Anja Bechmann, Michael Zimmer, Charles Ess, and the Association of Internet Researchers. 2020. Internet Research: Ethical Guidelines 3.0. Available at [URL]
Flynn, Mark, and Alexandru Stana. 2012. “Social Support in a Men’s Online Eating Disorder Forum.” International Journal of Men’s Health 11(2): 150–169. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Gough, Brendan. 2016. “Men’s Depression Talk Online: a Qualitative Analysis of Accountability and Authenticity in Help Seeking and Support Formulations.” Psychology of Men & Masculinity 17(1): 156–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanna, Esmée, and Brendan Gough. 2018. “Searching for Help Online: an Analysis of Peer-to-Peer Posts on a Male-Only Infertility Forum.” Journal of Health Psychology 23(7): 917–928. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, Eric. 2012. “Ascetic Hedonism: Self and Sexual Conquest in the Seduction Community.” Cultural Analysis 11(1): 1–14.Google Scholar
Heritage, Frazer, and Veronika Koller. 2020. “Incels, In-groups, and Ideologies: the Representation of Gendered Social Actors in a Sexuality-Based Online Community.” Journal of Language and Sexuality 9(2): 153–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Janet. 1988. “Paying Compliments: a Sex-Preferential Politeness Strategy.” Journal of Pragmatics 12(1): 445–465. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jones, Edward, and Thane Pittman. 1982. “Towards a General Theory of Strategic Self-Presentation.” In Psychological Perspectives on the Self, ed. by Jerry M. Suls, 2321–2362). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Krendel, Alexandra. 2020. The men and women, guys and girls of the ‘manosphere’: A corpus-assisted discourse approach. Discourse & Society 31(6): 607–630. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lave, Jean, and Étienne Wenger. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lawson, Robert, and Mark McGlashan. 2017. “You Need to Become Prime Dick”: a Corpus-Based Analysis of Self-Help Discourses and Gender Constructions in Online Seduction Communities. 116th annual American Anthropological Association meeting, Washington D.C, 30th November 2017.
Locher, Miriam. 2006. Advice Online: Advice-giving in an American Internet Health Column. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam, and Richard Watts. 2005. “Politeness Theory and Relational Work.” Journal of Politeness Research 1(1): 9–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marwick, Alice and Robyn Caplan. 2018. “Drinking Male Tears: Language, the Manosphere, and Networked Harassment.” Feminist Media Studies 18(4): 543–559. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McLean, Scott, and Laurie Vermeylen. 2019. “From Getting Ahead to Getting Back on One’s Feet: Performing Masculinity as a Self-Help Reader.” Men and Masculinities 22(4): 716–737. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mountford, JB. 2018. “Topic Modeling the Red Pill.” Social Sciences 7(3): 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, Rosaleen, Kate Hunt, and Graham Hart. 2005. “‘It’s Caveman Stuff, but That is to a Certain Extent How Guys Still Operate’: Men’s Accounts of Masculinity and Help-Seeking.” Social Science and Medicine 61(3): 503–516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Neill, Rachel. 2016. “Homosociality and Heterosex: Patterns of Intimacy and Relationality among Men in the London ‘Seduction Community’.” In A. Cornwall, F. G. Karioris & N. Lindisfarne (Eds.), Masculinities Under Neoliberalism. (pp.261–276). London: Zed Books. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rüdiger, Sofia, and Daria Dayter. 2020. “Manbragging Online: Self-Praise on Pick-Up Artists’ Forums.” Journal of Pragmatics 161(1): 16–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John. 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1976. “A Classification of Illocutionary Acts.” Language in Society 5(1): 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 1990. You Just Don’t Understand: Men and Women in Conversation. New York: Morrow.Google Scholar
Trosborg, Anna. 1995. Interlanguage Pragmatics. Requests, Complaints and Apologies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Valkenburgh, Shaun. 2021. “Digesting the Red Pill: Masculinity and Neoliberalism in the Manosphere.” Men and Masculinities 24(1): 84–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wenger, Étienne. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wright, Scott, Verity Trott, and Callum Jones. 2020. “‘The Pussy Ain’t Worth it, Bro’: Assessing the Structure and Discourse of MGTOW.” Information, Communication & Society 23(6): 908–925. DOI logoGoogle Scholar