Are women all seeking a Chad?

An analysis of incel culture and sexual dynamics leading into adulthood.

A common sentiment you hear when perusing manosphere circles is the idea that the modern woman spends all her “best” and “most fertile” years sleeping around with Chads, only to land herself a beta male once she’s all dried up and worn out. If those terms seem foreign to you, I envy your ignorance. Essentially, men on a very segregated corner of the internet have materialised a male hierarchy reflected on social status and fixed physical traits. You have alpha men at the top of the chain, with beta males underneath. There are lower categories, as well as categories that exist outside this hierarchy, though I’d rather just focus on these two in the theory I’ll be posing. Alphas rank highest in social status and are the ones who have sexual access, while beta males are only granted such access (if any) once young women have been chewed and spat out of the system, looking to settle down with someone that can take care of them financially.

These talking points persist throughout the manosphere and reinforce men’s distrust of women, seeing them as flippant, shallow and vapid. However, through many conversations with peers and extensive online browsing on male-centric forums, I’ve come to understand that the phenomenon they describe actually very closely aligns with a common phenomenon women experience as they come into adulthood. One where they are being chewed up and spat out, but by patriarchy itself. That the “Chads” women often find themselves with, ripe out of high school/college and seeking companionship, are often the men that help them understand the inherently patriarchal world around them. These women come away, transformed (and often traumatised) by the manipulation for sexual access, and thus grow to find themselves gravitating towards stability, emotional awareness, and comfort. By understanding that manosphere men have not just pulled this ideology from thin air, but instead deconstructing this widely perceived phenomena, I feel we’re able to help bridge an ever-widening ideological gap between genders.

So, what is a Chad anyway?

A Chad is a man who carves his own path. A man who’s monetarily, socially, and sexually successful. He is a man without boundaries, he is a man who takes risks. The sort of man who can flirt with a woman at a bar and take her home. The mystique of a Chad rings similar to how many women felt in high school watching the most popular girl receive all the attention from peers. Though, a the key highlight here, is that a Chad gets women. What I always found interesting when speaking of a Chad, is that “getting women” almost always refers primarily to sexual access. His interest in women only extends as far the physical. Marriage and children may be a bonus, but only if he wishes, and when he feels the need to spread his seed. Ironically, a lot of incels bemoan online about their need for companionship, while idealising “alpha” men for doing the exact opposite. For emotional intimacy holds no place in an alpha man’s life, or rather manosphere men see sexual and emotional intimacy as indistinguishable from each other.

Alpha men are pick up artists, entrepreneurs, gym junkies, and -quite importantly- sexually aggressive. They take what they want, they never have to ask. They can do these things because they (allegedly) possess genetic qualities that make them much more attractive to women than the lowly beta male. A strong jawline, a macho build, a full head of hair, a large penis. All markers that a beta male has no chance of achieving as he was born with genetic faults that make him unattractive to the modern woman. It’s only once the beta male reaches some sort of financial stability that he appears on her radar; as according to these men, money and fuckability are the two things women care about. What is ironic about this sentiment is that it acts as utter projection, as these are the only things men within the manosphere seem to talk about.

However, there is an idea amongst manosphere men that Chads, while simultaneously the envy of every beta/incel out there, are also applauded in their ability to control women and use them. Almost as if these men provide the service of “humbling” the modern woman, lest she get too clucky and feel she is in control of her sexuality. I’d like to note here, the prevailing notion amongst these men is that women have the ultimate control in who they decide to date and copulate with, a term known as “hypergamy” which is a whole other topic for another day. But ultimately, these men seem to feel some sort of respite with the knowledge that women who choose to date the most attractive of men, are the ones who are regurgitated by them once they’ve lost their sexual value. Almost as a sort of schadenfreude, the pleasure in watching a woman’s downfall.

What about beta men?

This is where the beta male comes in. He cannot hold a candle to the Chad due to his “genetic short comings”; maybe he’s short, a rounded jaw, slim shoulders, typically “un-masculine” qualities that supposedly limit his ability to court women. He must instead focus on other ways he can attract women, turning to “experts” such as pickup artists and life coaches that tell him to go to the gym. The primary focus for these men, however, lies on fiscal success, as it’s their only hope to attract a woman who years for “stability”.

A “nice guy” far too long, he will take what he can get. While bitter at her settling, the beta male ultimately takes it as a win. After many years of waiting his turn, he’s granted the leftovers that hold the mutual goal of bearing a child. I’d like to note that while many men in this ideology reject this notion, and would rather wallow about their genetic deficiencies, many wholly accept this is the path they’re granted. For them, this means consistent sex with a woman who will be loyal after her years of being burnt by Chad’s who (incels willingly acknowledge) are assholes.

This narrative prevails over incel ideology. Give or take a few details, these largely are what men in these circles accept as the way of modern society. And what they observe on the surface, the notion of woman dating and sleeping with attractive but horrible men when they’re younger and moving towards dating less aggressive, brash, and often less outwardly masculine men, isn’t actually completely unfounded. They are observing what many women go through in their 20s, as they attempt to navigate love and dating with the name naiveté these men also possess. Where the difference lies in these perceptions, is the agency they believe women have around this time.

On “getting it” and learning insidious patriarchy.

When I think of the concept of “getting it” I think of my sister walking proudly, and with an element of frustration, into the lounge room where I sat and worked on my laptop. She exclaimed “I get it!”. My ears pricked, eyes rising from above the screen, and I asked what she meant. She tells me she gets what I’ve been trying to tell her, that a man’s desire doesn’t hold the value she once believed. And this, is the root of what “getting it” means.

A common sentiment we find as we grow up is how much we are focused on catering to man’s needs and wants. What is deemed sexy, fun, interesting, all falls in the hands of men. The sort of films that win awards, the sort of ads that run on our screens, all centred around a man’s gaze, his desires. Of course, while this is all omnipresent and collective, these trickle down into our individual interactions. We put men’s emotional and sexual needs before our own. We watch our mothers cook and clean for our fathers, we watch the way she runs herself exhausted so he remains the happy patriarch. We watch the cooler, older girls in school date the hot older boys in their fast cars, smoking cigarettes out the window. We see films where women written by men fall hopelessly for cold, unemotional men, and we watch as they break their own boundaries for a chance at loving them.

All of these examples of women are ones we grew up to be envious of. We are pit against women who are sexually desirable, who are wanted. Single, adult women are demonised, married women are seen to be taking the right path. A studious teenager with little care for makeup or dressing provocatively is juxtaposed with her sexually curious, more popular counterpart. My best friend’s wedding was considered counter cultural for a woman daring to accept that the man she wanted ended up desiring someone else.

Throughout the most formative of our years we are presented with the idea that a man’s desire considers us valuable. By attaining his love and desire, he gives us worth we didn’t think we were capable of having. It’s only when we enter the adult world; wherein we actually date men, engage with them in the work place, through friend circles, that the illusion shatters.

From the women I’ve spoken to about this, many consistent ideas flow through their stories. They may find themselves entangled within a man who may be physically attractive and reciprocate privately, but he refuses to take her on dates, or be emotionally intimate with her in public. While they choose men who exhibit traits that on the surface seem enticing; charming, playful, conversational, these fall flat once intercourse has happened. Many women will withhold engaging in intercourse for several dates, only to find once access is given they’re ghosted by the potential mate. If they get so far as to enter into a serious relationship with a man, they find he falls flat on several aspects like emotional regulation, empathetic dialogue, and the ability to communicate effectively about qualms in the relationship.

And so, women spend years plucking and waxing body hair, eating well, making sure to attain the markers of physical desirability, all for men who think wiping their ass makes them gay. We see their hang-ups on masculinity, the lack of care they give themselves and others. We see the way they fail to meet the basic emotional needs of those around them. We realise that the value we were supposedly pining for comes from a source that has little value in themselves.

Regardless of his physical attributes, he lacks what the world around us had prepared us for. So the glass ceiling shatters, and we begin to see a lot of men for what they are.

On a darker note, 18-35 is also the most common age for women to experience intimate partner violence. It’s also telling that way less women are single at this age than men. So who are these women dating? Likely, they’re dating older, and it would be even less of a stretch to assume that older men deliberately target young women as intimate/dating prospects. Many women I’ve met can recount that one relationship they’ve had with an older man around this age, and the ways he would pressure her to break emotional/sexual boundaries. With the complete lack of experience and understanding in how these men operate, it’s quite blatant why these women are seen as the most viable prospects for sexually driven, older men.

These men, likely the ‘attractive Chads’ incels speak about, come into the dating sphere armed with their good looks and the knowledge that these young women don’t know any better.* Women will consistently give these men a chance, through casual and serious dating, until they learn themselves that his misogyny is foundational. Once she has lived enough, seen enough, she likely knows better not to entangle herself with him.

And truly, at the source of it all, is what this is about. These women are seen as bitter and jaded once they’ve awoken to the (at worst) atrocities of the modern man and (at best) his seeming lack of care and emotional intelligence. With enough experience dating men who are abusive, uncaring, unkind, unemotional, it’s very clear why she may gravitate towards more placid men, or gravitate away from men entirely.

Most importantly, we come to understand that our worth does not come from men, nor how they view us sexually, or as a viable romantic partner. It is no coincidence that the happiest women are single, childless, and with a support network of other women.

What it’s all about: Agency.

When we look at these ‘two sides’ of the story, the one key defining difference is the way we view a woman’s agency. Manosphere men believe women not only possess and are fully conscious of their agency around that age, but also that they purposefully use it for their own gain. Though as stated, this is far from the truth.

Adulthood (for many) involves a process of unlearning what was heavily instilled in us from a young age. We unwaveringly accept what our parents, teachers, and authority figures tell our malleable little brains. A major aspect of this is learning and unlearning how we relate to gender roles, how we fit and fail to fit into them, and how we relate to other genders in the process. Many young men, still clamouring out of puberty and likely romantically unsuccessful, are trained and much more likely to externalise their frustration. They assume women know better, and that women hold control and power through sexual agency. Meanwhile, it’s much more expected of young women (who hit puberty earlier) to emotionally empathise, internalise, and emotionally regulate.

To expand on the earlier ‘*’, a common counter-point when stating women don’t know any better is the accusation of infantilising these women and totally stripping them of any agency. To side step the fact this is simply contrarian, and is a product of neoliberal feminist talking points, my aim when speaking about the lack of agency young women possess is the bottled-down result of centuries of patriarchy. It would be ridiculous to assume we have all collectively un-learnt the deeply instilled biases, rigid gender roles, and misogynistic sexual dynamics that have predated feminist movements by several hundreds of years. The fault is not in infantilising young women, but in failing to understand that patriarchy is wholly encompassing, woven into societal fabric, and consistently pervasive.

Whatever agency we do possess is overtaken by the ever-evolving ways in which patriarchal structures seek to garner the upper hand. Thus, there is little women can do within this misogynistic sphere. We can only look to deconstruct it, and change from the ground up.

So, do all women want a Chad?

The simplest answer, is no. The saddest aspect of manosphere cults is knowing that many young men start off observing phenomena like this one, and seeing it in themselves. Maybe women in their lives have passed on giving them a shot in favour of a short term relationship with men more conventionally attractive than themselves. Maybe they’ve been “friend-zoned” by a woman they’ve been pining for since day 1. It’s within the predaceous nature of manosphere groups to take men like this and radicalize them by pointing the finger at the women who scorned them.

Instead, I believe that the finger is better directed at the systems in place that allow such division. Social media algorithms that drive a further wedge in ideology gaps. Dating apps that are designed to fail us over and over again. The manosphere itself, which could not have formed if not for forums and websites designed to act as echo chambers that only feed into further misogynistic ideology. All aspects that have created a hostile, desolate environment that leave little space for love, vulnerability, and equality to thrive.

I want to believe that by breaking down the way these men have been taught to think and feel, we can hopefully pull them out of the vacuous, ever-terrifying bubble. And hey, maybe if they did, they’d get laid once in a while.

AUTHOR’S NOTE: You may notice reading this essay that it’s largely cis/hetero-normative. This was a purposeful choice, as I believe deconstructing incel ideology starts at the baseline, with terminology most understood by the broadest audience. To add, most incels see the world through this lens, and by engaging with that lens, it’s easier to deconstruct.