The publication of David Robson’s TES article, The Manosphere’s Influence is Growing – Can Teachers Fight Back? (2026), reflects growing societal concern about the influence of online misogynistic communities on young people. Drawing upon research from psychologists, educational researchers, teaching unions and regulatory bodies, the article presents compelling evidence that exposure to misogynistic content is becoming increasingly commonplace among school-aged children. Teachers report rising incidents of sexist language, harassment, abuse towards female staff and the normalisation of harmful attitudes towards women.
While the article rightly highlights the broader implications for schools, behaviour and safeguarding, one particularly vulnerable group receives little direct attention: pupils with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND).
This omission is significant. Research across psychology, education and safeguarding consistently demonstrates that many SEND learners experience heightened vulnerability to manipulation, misinformation, online exploitation and extremist narratives (HM Government, 2023; Department for Education, 2024). The characteristics associated with autism spectrum conditions, ADHD, social communication difficulties, learning disabilities and speech and language needs may increase susceptibility to the simplistic, emotionally appealing and highly persuasive messages frequently found within manosphere content.
This article argues that the rise of the manosphere represents not merely a behaviour or safeguarding concern but a profound educational challenge for SEND provision. It explores why SEND learners may be disproportionately vulnerable, examines the potential consequences for social development and mental health, and offers evidence-informed recommendations for educators and families.
Understanding the Manosphere
The term “manosphere” refers to a loose network of online communities centred around men’s issues, masculinity and gender relations (as recently explored in a documentary by Louis Theroux). According to Ofcom’s recent investigation, these online spaces frequently contain misogynistic narratives that frame women as adversaries, feminism as oppressive and traditional male dominance as desirable (Ofcom, 2025).
The manosphere includes:
- Red-pill communities
- Black-pill communities
- Incel forums
- Pickup artist networks
- Male self-improvement influencers
- Anti-feminist content creators
Although these communities differ in tone and ideology, many share common themes:
- Hostility towards women
- Rejection of gender equality
- Narratives of male victimhood
- Hypermasculinity
- Social dominance
Robson (2026) notes that exposure is increasingly unavoidable. Research from Dublin City University found that TikTok and YouTube algorithms recommended manosphere content within twenty-six minutes regardless of whether users searched for explicitly misogynistic terms or entirely unrelated interests such as fitness or comedy.
This finding is particularly concerning when considered alongside evidence that 79% of UK boys aged 16-17 reported consuming content created by Andrew Tate (Hope Not Hate, 2023, cited in Robson, 2026).
SEND and Vulnerability to Online Radicalisation
The Prevent Duty Guidance identifies social isolation, identity uncertainty, emotional vulnerability and a need for belonging as factors that may increase susceptibility to extremist narratives (HM Government, 2023). Many SEND learners experience precisely these vulnerabilities.
Importantly, vulnerability does not imply inevitability. The vast majority of SEND pupils will never become radicalised or adopt extremist beliefs. However, the interaction between neurodevelopmental differences and manipulative online environments warrants serious consideration.
Autism Spectrum Conditions and Black-and-White Thinking
One of the most significant risk factors concerns autism spectrum conditions (ASC). Research suggests that autistic individuals frequently demonstrate strengths in logical reasoning, pattern recognition and rule-based thinking (Baron-Cohen, 2008). However, some autistic young people may experience difficulties (Milton, 2017) with:
- Social inference
- Interpreting hidden intentions
- Understanding nuance
- Recognising manipulation
- Evaluating contradictory viewpoints
The manosphere thrives on simplistic explanations for complex social realities.
Messages such as “Women only want wealthy men,” “Society is rigged against males,” and “Feminism has destroyed relationships,” offer certainty in situations that are inherently complex.
For autistic adolescents struggling to navigate friendship groups, romantic relationships or social hierarchies, these explanations can appear attractive because they reduce ambiguity.
Milton’s (2012) theory of the “double empathy problem” further suggests that autistic individuals often experience repeated social misunderstandings with non-autistic peers. If these experiences lead to rejection, loneliness or confusion, manosphere narratives may provide an apparently coherent explanation for those difficulties.
The TES article highlights how many pupils repeat misogynistic claims without fully understanding them, demonstrating a form of social mimicry rather than critical engagement.
This phenomenon is particularly relevant for autistic learners who may rely heavily on observed social scripts when attempting to understand peer culture.
ADHD, Reward-Seeking and Algorithmic Exploitation
Young people with ADHD may face different but equally significant vulnerabilities.
ADHD is associated with (Barkley, 2015):
- Impulsivity
- Sensation seeking
- Reward dependence
- Emotional dysregulation
- Reduced inhibitory control
Modern social media algorithms are designed to exploit precisely these cognitive characteristics. TikTok, Instagram Reels and YouTube Shorts utilise immediate gratification, novelty, emotional intensity and rapid content transitions to maximise engagement.
The manosphere frequently packages misogynistic messages within highly stimulating content involving:
- Luxury lifestyles
- Fast cars
- Wealth displays
- Physical transformation
- Dominance narratives
Gilmour notes in the TES article that many young people are initially drawn to such content because of the aspirational lifestyle rather than the misogyny itself.
However, through associative learning, adolescents begin linking success, status and masculinity with misogynistic attitudes.
For learners with ADHD, whose neurological reward systems already favour immediate reinforcement, this process may occur particularly rapidly (Volkow et al., 2011).
Social Communication Needs and Persuasive Manipulation
Students with Speech, Language and Communication Needs (SLCN) face additional risks.
Language difficulties can affect the ability to:
- Detect rhetorical techniques
- Evaluate evidence
- Interpret persuasive language
- Recognise emotional manipulation
(Bishop et al., 2017).
Many manosphere influencers present opinions as objective facts.
Statements are frequently framed as:
- “The truth they don’t want you to hear.”
- “Facts over feelings.”
- “What nobody else will tell you.”
Such language creates a false sense of authority while discouraging critical evaluation.
Learners with communication difficulties may struggle to identify these persuasive techniques, increasing vulnerability to misinformation.
Literacy Difficulties and Critical Media Consumption
One of the most overlooked aspects of the discussion concerns literacy.
Research consistently demonstrates that literacy extends far beyond decoding text. Critical literacy (Luke, 2018) requires individuals to:
- Evaluate sources.
- Identify bias.
- Analyse evidence.
- Challenge assumptions.
- Compare perspectives.
Many pupils with SEND experience persistent literacy difficulties.
The Education Endowment Foundation (2021) notes that pupils with SEND are disproportionately represented among struggling readers.
When literacy difficulties combine with algorithm-driven video content, pupils may consume information passively rather than critically.
The shift from reading to short-form video further reduces opportunities for reflection and analysis.
Consequently, SEND learners may become consumers of content rather than evaluators of information.
Belonging, Identity and Social Exclusion
Perhaps the most important factor is social belonging.
Baumeister and Leary’s (1995) influential theory argues that the need to belong is a fundamental human motivation. Many SEND pupils experience (Humphrey & Symes, 2010):
- Bullying
- Social rejection
- Loneliness
- Exclusion
The manosphere often functions as an identity community. It offers:
- Shared experiences
- Recognition
- Validation
- Brotherhood
- Explanations for failure
For socially isolated young people, these communities can become psychologically powerful.
This mirrors pathways observed in broader radicalisation research, where extremist groups frequently recruit individuals experiencing social marginalisation (Borum, 2011).
Educational Consequences
The impact extends far beyond misogynistic attitudes. Research suggests exposure can contribute to:
- Deteriorating Peer Relationships = Students may develop adversarial views of girls and women.
- Reduced Empathy = Repeated exposure can normalise sexist attitudes.
- Behavioural Escalation = Teachers increasingly report harassment, intimidation and verbal abuse.
- Mental Health Difficulties = Contrary to promises of empowerment, research associates manosphere involvement with increased anxiety, hostility and depression (Ging, 2019).
- Increased Vulnerability to Further Extremism = Wescott notes that misogyny frequently serves as a gateway to broader extremist ideologies.
Recommendations for Schools
Develop SEND-Specific Digital Literacy Programmes
Traditional online safety lessons often focus on broad themes such as cyberbullying, privacy settings and stranger danger. While important, these approaches may not adequately address the specific vulnerabilities experienced by SEND learners. Pupils with autism, ADHD, social communication difficulties, learning disabilities and speech and language needs may require more explicit teaching about how online content is designed to influence emotions, beliefs and behaviour.
Digital literacy programmes should therefore be carefully adapted to meet diverse learning needs. Teaching should include direct instruction on how algorithms work, how influencers generate income from engagement, and how online platforms deliberately encourage users to spend longer consuming content. Concepts such as manipulation, misinformation, confirmation bias and online radicalisation should be broken down into accessible language and supported through visual resources, social stories, structured discussions and scenario-based learning.
Effective programmes should include:
- Explicit teaching of online persuasion techniques.
- Repeated opportunities to revisit key concepts throughout the school year.
- Visual supports, graphic organisers and worked examples.
- Real-world case studies demonstrating how online narratives can influence behaviour.
- Guided practice in evaluating online content.
- Opportunities to role-play responses to harmful online interactions.
- Adapted resources for pupils with literacy and language difficulties.
- Discussions about masculinity, identity and belonging in age-appropriate ways.
Importantly, digital literacy should not be viewed as a one-off intervention. As online trends evolve rapidly, schools should develop a progressive curriculum that builds pupils’ resilience over time and responds to emerging online risks.
Integrate Critical Literacy Across the Curriculum
The ability to critically evaluate information has become a fundamental literacy skill in the digital age. However, critical literacy is often confined to PSHE lessons or occasional online safety assemblies. Given the scale of misinformation encountered by young people, schools should instead embed critical literacy throughout the curriculum.
Students should routinely be taught to question:
- Who created this content?
- What is their purpose?
- What evidence supports their claims?
- Who benefits from this message?
- What viewpoints are missing?
- How might different people interpret this information?
English lessons can explore persuasive language, rhetoric and bias. History lessons can examine propaganda and historical misinformation. Science lessons can investigate evidence-based reasoning and pseudoscience. Computing lessons can explore algorithms, data collection and recommendation systems. PSHE can then reinforce these concepts through discussions about social media, relationships and online communities.
For SEND learners, critical literacy teaching should be highly structured. Teachers should model thinking processes aloud, explicitly demonstrate how to evaluate sources and provide scaffolded opportunities for pupils to practise these skills independently. This is particularly important for pupils who may struggle to identify hidden meanings, sarcasm, manipulation or emotional persuasion.
Ultimately, critical literacy should be recognised as a safeguarding tool as much as an academic skill. The ability to question information is one of the most powerful protective factors against misinformation, online exploitation and extremist narratives.
Promote Positive Masculinity and Healthy Identity Development
Schools have an important role in helping young people develop healthy, balanced understandings of masculinity. While much discussion around the manosphere focuses on harmful messages, it is equally important to provide positive alternatives that meet young people’s needs for identity, belonging and purpose.
Many boys encounter manosphere content while searching for guidance on confidence, fitness, relationships, success or self-improvement. Schools should therefore create opportunities for pupils to explore these topics through constructive and evidence-informed approaches.
Positive masculinity initiatives should promote:
- Respect for self and others.
- Emotional literacy and emotional regulation.
- Healthy expressions of strength and resilience.
- Empathy and perspective-taking.
- Positive relationships and consent.
- Responsibility and accountability.
- Help-seeking behaviours.
- Respect for diversity and equality.
Schools should actively showcase a diverse range of male role models, including athletes, authors, community leaders, teachers, scientists, artists and mentors who demonstrate positive values. These role models should challenge stereotypes that equate masculinity solely with dominance, aggression or emotional suppression.
Mentoring programmes, discussion groups and enrichment activities can provide safe spaces for boys to discuss issues such as friendship, social media, confidence, mental health and relationships. Rather than condemning young people who engage with problematic online content, schools should encourage critical reflection and support pupils in developing their own informed views.
Strengthen Safeguarding Procedures and Staff Training
The influence of misogynistic online communities should be recognised as a contemporary safeguarding issue that intersects with online safety, mental health, extremism and behaviour. Consequently, safeguarding systems must evolve to reflect emerging digital risks.
All school staff should receive training that enables them to recognise potential indicators of harmful online influence. Training should include:
- Common manosphere terminology and language.
- Incel and red-pill narratives.
- Signs of online radicalisation and ideological grooming.
- Gender-based violence and misogyny.
- The role of algorithms in content exposure.
- Links between online communities and extremist ideologies.
- The particular vulnerabilities of SEND learners.
Staff should understand that pupils may not always fully understand the beliefs they repeat. Consequently, safeguarding responses should prioritise education, curiosity and intervention rather than punishment alone.
Schools should also review safeguarding policies to ensure that online misogyny, image-based abuse, AI-generated sexual content, harassment and gender-based incidents are explicitly addressed. Recording systems should allow staff to identify patterns and monitor emerging concerns.
Close collaboration between safeguarding leads, SEND teams, pastoral staff and parents is essential. Multi-agency working may be required where online behaviours suggest broader vulnerabilities or risks.
Foster Inclusive School Communities and a Sense of Belonging
Research consistently identifies belonging as one of the strongest protective factors against radicalisation, extremism and harmful online influence (Department for Education, 2024). Young people who feel valued, connected and accepted are significantly less likely to seek validation from harmful online communities.
This is particularly relevant for SEND learners, many of whom experience social isolation, bullying or difficulties developing friendships. Schools should therefore prioritise inclusion not only as an educational goal but also as a safeguarding strategy.
Effective approaches may include:
- Peer mentoring schemes.
- Structured social skills programmes.
- Lunch clubs and interest-based groups.
- SEND ambassador programmes.
- Student leadership opportunities.
- Cooperative learning activities.
- Inclusive extracurricular provision.
- Supported opportunities for social interaction.
Schools should actively celebrate neurodiversity and challenge stigma surrounding SEND. Creating environments where differences are understood and respected can reduce feelings of marginalisation that may otherwise increase vulnerability to harmful online narratives.
Relationships remain one of the most powerful protective factors in a young person’s life. Every SEND learner should have access to trusted adults who know them well, understand their needs and can provide guidance when concerns arise. Strong relationships with teachers, mentors and peers help build resilience, strengthen identity and create a sense of belonging that online communities often seek to exploit.
Ultimately, safeguarding against the influence of the manosphere is not solely about preventing exposure to harmful content. It is about creating educational environments where young people feel connected, valued, informed and empowered to think critically about the world around them.
Guidance for Parents
Parents should avoid panic-based responses. Gilmour argues that curiosity is more effective than confrontation.
Parents should:
- Ask Open Questions
- What do you like about this person?”
- “What do you think they are trying to teach?”
- Discuss Algorithms
- Explain that platforms are designed to maximise attention rather than provide balanced information.
- Encourage Alternative Role Models
- Help young people find mentors who promote achievement without misogyny.
- Monitor Without Spying
- Maintain oversight while preserving trust.
- Build Offline Identity
- Encourage participation in sport, hobbies, volunteering and community activities.
Conclusion
The rise of the manosphere represents a significant safeguarding and educational challenge. The evidence presented by Robson (2026) suggests that misogynistic content is increasingly entering schools through algorithm-driven social media systems.
For SEND learners, the risks may be particularly acute. Difficulties with social understanding, critical literacy, communication, executive functioning and belonging can interact with online environments in ways that increase vulnerability to manipulative narratives. While SEND itself is not a risk factor for misogyny, the structural barriers many SEND pupils experience may make them more susceptible to communities that offer certainty, identity and acceptance.
The solution is not censorship alone. Rather, schools and families must work together to develop critical thinkers, digitally literate citizens and socially connected young people capable of questioning simplistic narratives and engaging thoughtfully with the increasingly complex online world.
References
- Barkley, R. A. (2015) Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Handbook for Diagnosis and Treatment. 4th ed. New York: Guilford Press.
- Baron-Cohen, S. (2008) Autism and Asperger Syndrome. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Baumeister, R.F. and Leary, M.R. (1995) ‘The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation’, Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), pp. 497–529.
- Bishop, D.V.M. et al. (2017) ‘Phase 2 of CATALISE’, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58(10), pp. 1068–1080.
- Borum, R. (2011) ‘Radicalization into violent extremism’, Journal of Strategic Security, 4(4), pp. 7–36.
- Department for Education (2024) Education Against Hate: Preventing Radicalisation Guidance. London: DfE.
- Education Endowment Foundation (2021) Special Educational Needs in Mainstream Schools Guidance Report. London: EEF.
- Ging, D. (2019) ‘Alphas, betas and incels: Theorising the masculinities of the manosphere’, Men and Masculinities, 22(4), pp. 638–657.
- HM Government (2023) Revised Prevent Duty Guidance for England and Wales. London: HMSO.
- Humphrey, N. and Symes, W. (2010) ‘Responses to bullying and use of social support among pupils with autism spectrum disorders’, Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 10(2), pp. 82–90.
- Luke, A. (2018) ‘Critical literacy, schooling and social justice’, Language, Culture and Curriculum, 31(1), pp. 1–17.
- Milton, D. (2012) ‘On the ontological status of autism’, Disability & Society, 27(6), pp. 883–887.
- Milton, D. (2017) A Mismatch of Salience: Explorations of the Nature of Autism. London: Pavilion.
- Robson, D. (2026) ‘The Manosphere’s Influence is Growing – Can Teachers Fight Back?’, TES, 3 June.
- Volkow, N.D. et al. (2011) ‘Motivation deficit in ADHD is associated with dysfunction of the dopamine reward pathway’, Molecular Psychiatry, 16(11), pp. 1147–1154.
Leave a Reply