This essay endeavours to comprehensively explore the mechanisms and reasons behind Western Muslim men being indoctrinated into the manosphere and red pill movement; a conceptual phenomenon within the manosphere. Furthermore, an investigation will be conducted into their endeavours to reconcile red pill principles with religious teachings, despite the inherent contradictions with Islamic doctrines. Subsequently, the essay will analyse interviews featuring Andrew Tate, a figure who lies on the red pill spectrum, who has amassed a substantial following and support among Muslim men (Onsori, 2022). These interviews will be treated as cultural artefacts, subjected to analysis to discern the role he played in the indoctrination process within this demographic.
The fundamental argument of their indoctrination hinges on a comprehensive understanding of the manosphere and red pill discourse. As articulated by Vallerga and Zurbriggen (2022, pg. 602), the manosphere constitutes a worldview that glorifies hegemonic masculinity while vehemently opposing feminist ideologies. This perspective is grounded in the belief that both societal structures and nature inherently favour women over men. The red pill movement advocates for the rejection of conventional societal norms, advocating instead for the adoption of an alternative perspective. This movement actively endorses the notion that men should resist conforming to societal expectations.
These characteristics’ significance lies in their direct resonance with Muslim men. However, the postulation positing societal favouritism toward women carries greater significance for Muslim men within the context of Islamic teachings. This is primarily due to Islam granting Muslim women inherent financial privileges surpassing those afforded to men. For the sake of argument relevance, the discussion will exclusively focus on the financial rights of a wife.
In a sermon available on YouTube, Belal Assaad (2023) emphasises the significance of these rights and underscores a husband’s responsibility to fulfil them. One such obligation is to provide the wife with a mehr (dowry), the amount of which is determined by the woman. The second responsibility entails the financial provision for the wife’s overall material well-being. Assaad elucidates that this encompasses provisions such as meals, attire, security, medical expenses, transportation, and hygiene products. The third responsibility entails providing the wife with an autonomous residence away from her in-laws should she desire it. If the man is unable to meet these financial commitments, she retains the right to reject the marriage.
A Muslim man’s inheritance and wages are therefore designated for supporting his family, particularly the women within it. Conversely, Muslim women are not obliged to contribute financially to household or family expenses, based on principles of equity within Islam. Though similar to Western masculinity, the obligations for Islamic masculinity are distinctly defined and fixed and persist regardless of economic positioning.
To implement Hooks’s framework (2003, pg. 8), she articulates a perspective in which she explains that during the 1900s, black men were denied complete employment access while black women were offered positions in the service economy. Subsequently, social critics consistently underscored the notion that black women symbolically emasculated black men. This was attributed to the perception that these women assumed matriarchal roles at home by virtue of their participation in the workforce, and assuming the primary breadwinner role.
However, it is Hook’s counterargument that holds relevancy in this context, given that the basis of her argument appears inapplicable to the Muslim demographic. To elaborate, Hooks (pg. 8) challenges this perspective by highlighting the reality that black women often contributed their earnings to support their families. She contends that if men retained financial control, they were generally indifferent to who earned more (pg. 9). The implicit argument suggested here is that a perception of emasculation would arise if women were to assume control instead. This phenomenon appears to be observable within the dynamics of Western Muslim male and female relationships.
Alongside fulfilling the financial rights of women, Hibri (2002, pg. 9) underscores that a woman is also “entitled to keep her finances separate and independent from those of her husband.” Hibri also notes that affluence does not negate a Muslim woman’s entitlement to complete support from her husband. Within this context, there exists a potential basis for substantiating the insinuation underlying Hooks’ assertion: “if the man controls the money, even if his wife is wealthy, the evidence suggests that he will not feel emasculated.”
The confluence of financial caretaking obligations and absence of entitlement to a woman’s wealth gives rise to a dynamic in which Muslim men may perceive an unjust imbalance. Likely to experience feelings of emasculation especially when unable to meet these financial obligations. This perspective gains further support from Dignam’s (2023) inquiry into whether economic frustrations contribute to the proliferation of red-pill rhetoric within Western Muslim spaces. In her analysis, Dignam cites Furvah’s (2022) study, revealing that nearly 50% of British Muslims experienced poverty in 2022. Consequently, this engenders resentment towards female counterparts exempted from equivalent financial obligations and reinforces their alignment with hegemonic masculinity as a means of preserving a semblance of control. Additionally, Rehan (2022) notes that during recent uncertain economic times, there is a notable sense of existential discomfort among Muslim men, as foundational aspects of masculinity such as marriage and economic primacy become less attainable. Consequently, this creates “an identity crisis which sees Muslim men aggressively assume exaggerated and superficial qualities of masculinity as defence.”
An embodiment of these qualities is exemplified in their indoctrination into the red pill movement, which partly stems from deliberately retaliating against Muslim women perceived to idolise feminism and demonise patriarchy. This is one of the ways in which women are “treated especially egregiously in many modern Muslim societies, including in the name of so-called Islamic law” (El-Ali, 2021, pg. 105-106). In Western societies, Muslim men often oppose tenets of feminism that grant women a sense of liberation. These include a woman’s entitlement to employment, education, and, in extreme instances, the autonomy to leave her residence. In their efforts to exert control over Muslim women, these men employ the guise of safeguarding them from involvement in perceived sinful behaviours such as free interaction and the creation of fitnah (trial), ostensibly tempting men. It is crucial to acknowledge that, initially, Islamic doctrine exhibits alignment with certain elements of the red pill ideology, yet it also shares an affinity with certain feminist principles. The divergence in paradigms is what distinguishes Islam from these two ideologies. In the feminist context, this alignment encompasses the permission for women to pursue employment and the religious obligation for them to seek education. As Eli-Ali (pg. 108) contends, adopting the opposing perspective is “an extraordinary view” that deprives women of the means to serve God as His representative on earth, additionally diminishing their God-given dignity.
To employ Eli-Ali’s theories (pg. 59-60) within the context of Muslim men’s rationale for overlooking or disavowing certain rights, several justifications emerge. The first rationale pertains to the fact that numerous Muslims do not engage in a direct study of the Qur’an, relying instead on local or imported trends to fill the resulting informational void. The second rationale posits that among those who do read the Qur’an, the approach is often more technical than reflective. This tendency may be closely linked to Eli-Ali’s third theory, contending that many individuals read translations of the Qur’an that are either substantially influenced by specific agendas or predominantly shaped by prevailing cultural norms. These theoretical frameworks are transferable to other tenets of Islam, such as Hadiths or Sunnahs.
While Eli-Ali attributes this phenomenon to passive ignorance, it is conceivable that it derives from wilful ignorance, wherein individuals deliberately overlook Islamic teachings because such teachings do not align with their interests or benefits, compared to the principles associated with the red pill ideology. This intentional ignorance is frequently manifested through the alignment of red pill principles with religious teachings, often taken out of context, and employed who subordinate women (Dignam, 2023).
As Dignam mentions, this phenomenon persists notwithstanding prominent women since the inception of Islam. Such as Khadījah being an affluent businesswoman before and during her marriage with Prophet Muhammad, as well Fatima Al-Fihri, a Muslim woman credited as the founder of the world’s first university. With numerous instances, the consensus is that women have positively contributed within and for Islam since its inception, whether through active participation in battles to defend the Islamic message or through scholarly engagement in learning and teaching Islam. This phenomenon is akin to Hook’s (pg. 6) assertion that “most black men recognized the powerful and necessary role black women had played as freedom fighters in the effort to abolish slavery, yet they still wanted black women to be subordinated.”
Where it is plausible that, like post-manumission black men, Muslim men aspire to be recognised as patriarchs, the insufficient acknowledgment and protection of Islamic rights for Muslim women in Western societies hinder this aspiration. This is particularly significant given that, analogous to the desires of black women, Muslim women seek protection and provision without the imposition of dominance (Hooks, pg. 7). However, even if women assert their rights within the framework of Islam, they face accusations of deviating from Islamic norms and are labelled as a ‘kāfir’ (a term often translated as ‘nonbeliever’ and ‘non-Muslim’). The purported justification behind this categorisation is grounded in the impermissibility of embracing secularly feminist ideology, juxtaposed with the argument that Islam already encompasses a “moral code upon which marital relations and rights are honoured” (Rehan, 2022). Rehan posits that the red pill identity assumed by Western Muslim men is as much a product of secular ideology as the feminism they purport to combat in a righteous struggle. This may indicate a viable theory that these men simply oppose any ideology that challenges the internalised hierarchy, which is entrenched in preserving established power dynamics and control in contemporary society.
Andrew Tate’s influence on appealing Muslim men to the manosphere can be understood through various perspectives. Chief among these is the notion, posited by Pervaz and Asad (2022, pg. 63), that Muslims “want validation from the West about their religion and way of living.” This desire for validation may be rooted in the post-9/11 era, where Muslims have often been unjustly portrayed as barbaric and prone to violence, leading to their victimisation through the lens of the violent Muslim rhetoric, particularly affecting Muslim men. In a video republished by Muslim Convert Stories (2021), Tate, an American-British individual who identified as an Orthodox Christian at the time, overtly endorses Islam and its adherents, expressing profound respect for their ideology, mentality, and warrior ethos.
He respectfully acknowledges that “Muslims are intolerant […] if you’re tolerant of everything, then you stand for nothing.” This aligns with the narrative that Muslims, due to the strict nature of their religion that refuses to suit contemporary societal norms, are expected by the West to assimilate. The significance of Tate’s validation is underscored when he contrasts Muslim intolerance with the tolerance exhibited by Christians, referencing queer pastors and the acceptance of the LGBT+ community, despite, as stated by Tate, such acceptance contradicting Christian scriptures. This becomes particularly noteworthy as Muslims face criticism for their perceived lack of postmodernism. He states, “Christianity is a dead religion,” and if he had to bet on one religion he would have to bet on Islam. He contends that Islam is a valuable belief system that provides solutions to many of the challenges confronting men today. While refuting the prevalent violent and barbaric Muslim rhetoric, Tate highlights the safety of first-world Muslim nations.
While not entirely applicable, considering Tate is not entirely of white descent, Mazama’s (2018, pg. 31) argument on white validation can be partially extended. She posits that a significant number of black individuals experience what she terms as ‘White Validation Syndrome.’ According to Mazama, they are conditioned to perceive white individuals as superior and consciously or unconsciously acknowledge them as the ultimate authority. She further contends that Africans may feel the need for validation from whites to be considered fully human. In the case of Muslims, the necessity for validation may not be exclusively tied to white individuals but could extend to Westerners in general. This may be explained through Hook’s (pg. 45-46) observation that cultures of dominance, typically Western societies, have established and maintained a status quo through acts of violence. While Muslims require validation to affirm their humanity, Rehan proposes that Muslim men find satisfaction in such validation, as it signifies their inclusion in Western tradition and positions them as harbingers of progress. According to Rehan, “for a generation of young Muslim men, this signifies a shift in a value system that has long held them in a tight grip, presenting an opportunity for cultural redemption.”
Therefore, Tate’s appraisal of Islam not only empowers but also validates these men, enhancing their proclivity to embrace, implement, and uphold his ideologies, even when they diverge from Islamic teachings in certain aspects. An example of this, articulated by Tate in a Bffspod podcast (2022), pertains to his stance on female promiscuity. According to him, women should maintain sexual exclusivity, unlike men who can practise premarital sexual relations and polygamy. This viewpoint fundamentally contradicts Islamic theology, which prescribes abstinence from premarital sex for both genders. As Eli-Ali (pg. 105) contends, the Quran “establishes men and women’s natural and spiritual sameness, with God further declaring that He will assess the actions of both by the same measure.” While Islam permits marital polygamy, the prevailing view among most scholars emphasises its purpose as a social responsibility. However, Tate advocates for polygamy primarily based on male desire, as noted by Rehan. The adoption of these perspectives by Muslim men likely attributes to its alignment with their self-gratification and their agenda to subordinate women.
Upon Tate’s conversion to Islam in 2022, a cross-cultural appeal was established (Aqeedi, 2023), consequently amplifying support and sympathy from his Muslim supporters, notwithstanding the allegations against him. Quoting a statement from an interviewee as documented by Dignam, it is stated, “they provide leniency to Andrew Tate but won’t extend this to practising Muslim women who seek a career or don’t wear the hijab.” Suggesting a basis for fostering resentment among Muslim women who perceive an inequitable application of double standards.
While his intentions are ambiguous, Tate’s explicit discourse on physically harming women is widely interpreted as an endorsement of employing sexual and domestic violence against women as a method of exerting control over them. This perception is particularly prevalent among Muslim men who draw parallels between Tate’s statements and English translations (where certain Arabic terms lack precise equivalents) of Quranic verses, often without referencing the exegesis. Contrary to the Prophetic tradition centred on empathy, as highlighted by Rehan, some Muslim men argue that violence is necessary to discipline Western Muslim women, asserting that conventional Islamic guidance on marital discipline (tapping one’s wife as a last resort) is insufficient for dealing with perceived disobedience. The application of Hooks’s assertion (pg. 46) offers a potential rationale for this reconciliation. According to Hooks, Black men are born into a society that approves of violence as a method of social control. Similarly, Muslim men brought up in Western societies acknowledge that “displaying aggression is the most straightforward approach to assert patriarchal manhood.”
Irrespective of the precise motivations prompting Muslim men to align with and adopt principles from the manosphere and viewpoints articulated by Andrew Tate, this alignment engenders a schism between men and women within the Muslim community. The persistence of these dynamics has the potential to intensify the existing divide, posing a consequential threat to women, especially if instances of violence and control become more normalised within the Muslim community. This raises the likelihood of women, specifically, deviating from Islamic practices or even abandoning the religion entirely due to the unnecessary hardships perpetuated by the community.
The continued conflation of Islamic teaching and red pill tenets also tarnishes the authentic representation of Islam, which is already susceptible to violent stereotypes and misinterpretation. While Bjoernaas (2015, pg. 80) argues that “ostensible oppression and subjugation of Muslim women by Muslim men makes Islamophobia a self-justifying phenomenon,” the increasing reality of such subjugation will only serve to further validate Islamophobia.
Bibliography
Aqeedi, Rasha (2023). Andrew Tate and the Moral Bankruptcy of Muslim Proselytization. New Lines Magazine. Available from: https://newlinesmag.com/argument/andrew-tate-and-the-moral-bankruptcy-of-muslim-proselytization/
Belal Assaad (2023). Home Sweet Home – 3/3 – Spouses & In-laws. YouTube. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3tGv4tAffM&list=PLiOH4JO0EFBCAEPaxZIKD-mrU3abhMd23&index=15&ab_channel=BelalAssaad
Bffspod (2022). ANDREW TATE AND DAVE PORTNOY GO TOE TO TOE — BFFs EP. 88. YouTube. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyeprM1jHgs&ab_channel=BFFs%3ADavePortnoy%2CJoshRichards%26BriChickenfry
Dignam, Charlotte (2023). The Red pill, Misogyny, and So-Called ‘Islamic’ Justifications: A Toxic Trio Explained. Shout Out UK. Available from: https://www.shoutoutuk.org/2023/03/21/the-red-pill-misogyny-and-so-called-islamic-justifications-a-toxic-trio-explained/
Bjoernaas, Therese Ignacio (2015). Saving Muslim Women: A Feminist-postcolonial Critique of Veiling Legislation in Norway. In: Islamophobia Studies Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1. Pluto Journals.
El-Ali, Leena (2021). No Truth Without Beauty: God, the Qur’an, and Women’s Rights. Springer International Publishing.
Hibri, Azizah (2002). Islamic Law vs. Patriarchal Systems: A Woman’s Perspective. Law Faculty Publications.
Hooks, Bell (2003). We Real Cool: Black Men and Masculinity. Taylor & Francis Group.
Mazama, Ama (2018). Cognitive Hiatus and the White Validation Syndrome: An Afrocentric Analysis. In: Langmia, Kehbuma. (eds) Black/Africana Communication Theory. Germany: Springer International Publishing.
Muslim Convert Stories (2021). Christian Kickboxing Champion Praises Islam – Andrew Tate. YouTube. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watchv=3UJe6RVY0jg&list=PLiOH4JO0EFBCAEPaxZIKD-mrU3abhMd23&index=5&ab_channel=MuslimConvertStories
Onsori, Zahra (2022). Why are so many Muslim Men being entrapped by Andrew Tate? The Invitation. Available from: https://www.invitation-magazine.org/why-does-andrew-tate-appeal-to-muslim-men/
Pervaz, B., & Asad, T. (2022). Muslims’ Coherent Strategy Against the Rise of Islamophobia in France. In: Islamophobia Studies Journal, Vol. 7, No. 1. Pluto Journals.
Rehan, Mariya (2022). The Rise of the Muslim Incel: Ideological Victim Blaming and Its Harm to Muslim Women and Men. Amaliah. Available from: https://www.amaliah.com/post/66016/muslim-incel-mincel-red-pill-ideology-islam
Shah, Furvah (2022). One in five British Muslims have used food banks due to rising living costs. The Independent. Available from: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/british-muslims-food-banks-poverty-cost-of-living-b2223668.html
Vallerga, M., & Zurbriggen, E. L. (2022). Hegemonic masculinities in the ‘Manosphere’: A thematic analysis of beliefs about men and women on The Red pill and Incel. In: Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, Vol. 22. Wiley Periodicals, LLC.
