Abstract:

Wilhelm Reich’s 1932 book, The Sexual Struggle of Youth, is a key part of his ideas. He combined psychology and politics to show how young people suffer because their natural desires are suppressed. According to Reich, this frustration can only be fixed through social change. Even though things changed after the 1960s, we still see these problems today. A clear example is the "Incel" phenomenon (men who are single against their will). These men are often angry and suffering.

Reich would say they have developed "character armor"—a psychological defense that turns their frustration into bitterness. This hatred toward women often grows as women become more independent and as the traditional role of the "father figure" disappears in modern society.

It is also interesting to compare Reich with the Italian writer Pier Paolo Pasolini.

• Pasolini believed that modern capitalism destroyed traditional culture.
• He argued that we lost "real" human connection and replaced it with "docile bodies"—people who are easily controlled by consumerism.

Essentially, Reich predicted this shift thirty years before it actually happened.

Wilhelm Reich’s main goal was to stop other psychoanalysts from ignoring the importance of sex. He wanted to focus on sexuality and the "libido," just as Sigmund Freud did in the beginning, especially when it came to young people. His famous "Orgone theory" was actually created to prove that the libido is the most important part of human psychology. For Reich, having a healthy sexual release is essential for the body to stay balanced. He was very strict about this: if sexual tension is not released, the body becomes tight and develops what he called "muscular armor," which he believed could lead to serious illnesses like cancer. Reich felt that young people were in great danger because they face so many obstacles to a healthy sex life, such as a lack of privacy, money problems, or feeling guilty about masturbation. He warned that without a satisfying way to release this energy, young people are at high risk of becoming physically and mentally unwell. Adults who force young people to avoid sex only make things worse. Reich believed that Freud was too gentle when describing these problems. Reich used what he called a "functional" approach to reality. This is different from the "mystical" view, which thinks the spirit is more important than the body, and also different from the "mechanical" view, which sees the body as just a collection of parts without any life energy. Reich also made a big distinction between "healthy" sex and "pornographic" sex; he hated the latter because he saw it as just acting on low, animal instincts. This difference is why many people still misunderstand his work today. In his writing, Reich explained that sexuality is a huge, urgent issue for teenagers. He warned that the adult world must address it properly, otherwise, young people will continue to suffer from serious emotional and physical distress. Reich focused on the struggles young people faced when trying to escape the strict rules of the Family and the Church. He described how difficult it was for both working-class and middle-class youth to have a satisfying sex life. He covered many topics, including masturbation, sexual dysfunction, and the idea of "sexual friendship" between boys and girls. Reich believed that a capitalist, authoritarian society uses strict morality to control young people. Even today, his views on sex remain controversial because he saw it as a deep physical necessity rather than just a sensation. Even without looking at the complex science of "Orgone," Reich was right to analyze these sexual urges through both a psychological and social lens. By combining Freud’s and Marx’s ideas, he created a way of looking at youth frustration that is still very relevant today.

Today we see the "Incel" phenomenon, which involves young men who are single against their will and suffer because they cannot find a partner. While the term originally just described the feeling of being lonely and excluded, it has now become a radical group identity. These men often meet in online communities to share their frustration and anger. This is part of a larger digital world called the "Manosphere," which includes forums, podcasts, and influencers who promote very anti-feminist views. They see gender roles through a strict, biological lens and feel a lot of resentment toward women and modern society, which they believe is biased against men. These groups have turned personal suffering into a shared ideology that is often aggressive and organized. The term "Manosphere" combines the words "man" and "sphere." It is used to describe online networks where men talk about their lives, but it is also used to criticize the hateful or radical ideas found there. There are a few main beliefs at the heart of this culture. First, they believe the dating world is a "sexual market" controlled by a small number of "alpha" males. Second, they claim that women are naturally manipulative and only look for partners who can offer them more money or status. Finally, they feel that feminism has "stolen" power and dignity from average men, making them feel worthless in modern society. he LMS model is a main idea in the manosphere. It says a man’s value in dating depends almost entirely on three things: his looks, his money, and his social status. These communities use a specific language to describe a social hierarchy. At the top is the "Chad," the perfect "alpha" male who is handsome, tall, and very successful with women. Just below him is the "Brad," who is attractive and popular but not quite as "perfect." Then there is the "Beta," or the average man. In this worldview, a Beta isn’t naturally attractive but can get a partner by providing money and security. At the very bottom are the "Incels," men who believe they can never attract anyone because of physical flaws they cannot change. Finally, the "Blackpill" is the hopeless belief that dating is based only on genetics, meaning there is no point in trying to improve if you weren’t born lucky. Looksmaxxing is the attempt by a man to improve his physical appearance through the gym, skincare, or even surgery to raise his social status. A Stacy is the female version of a Chad—an extremely attractive woman that Incels believe only a Chad can date. A Becky represents an average woman, though Incel theory claims that even she has standards that are too high for average men because of dating apps. Hypergamy is the belief that women always look for partners with higher status, ignoring 80% of men to focus only on the top 20%. According to Incel culture, this problem got worse after 1968 when feminism changed society, leading to the strong anti-modern views found in the Manosphere. Finally, SMV stands for Sexual Market Value, which is a score from 1 to 10 that these men use to rank their own and others’ attractiveness.

This model turns human desire into a kind of market where people are treated like products and relationships are seen as business deals. It uses a twisted version of biology to ignore the emotional and symbolic side of human connection. "Redpilling" is described as an "awakening" where a man believes he has discovered the "true nature" of women—viewing them as manipulative and interested only in looks or money. Psychologically, this acts as a defense mechanism: instead of feeling like a failure, the man feels like he is smarter than everyone else because he "knows the truth." This is what Erich Fromm called the rationalization of impotence, where frustration is turned into a strict ideology. While the "redpill" encourages men to take action by improving their status or looks to "win the game," the "blackpill" is much more hopeless. It argues that the game is already lost and there is no way to win. According to this ideology: The blackpill ideology follows three main rules: first, your looks and money completely decide your future in relationships; second, trying to improve yourself is impossible and a waste of time; and third, the suffering of "incels" is permanent and cannot be fixed. This mindset turns the LMS model into a strict biological law, using cherry-picked statistics and fake science to prove its point. People who believe this fall into a deep, "depressive" way of thinking where they feel they have no control over their lives. In psychological terms, it is a collective ideology that justifies giving up, feeling hatred, or even being violent. Experts also point out that the digital economy makes money by feeding this anger and frustration. In this system, the "incel" man feels he is not responsible for his own failures; instead, he sees himself as a victim of biology, women, and the modern world. This creates an identity based on being a victim, which leads to deep resentment rather than a sense of community. This group is a type of deviant subculture that grows from feelings of exclusion and being left out. This deviance is shown online through hatred and symbolic violence. From a sociological view, the Manosphere is a reaction to the crisis of traditional masculinity. Since men have lost old certainties like stable jobs and patriarchal authority, they don’t see their failure as a personal mistake but as a systemic injustice. Jacob Johanssen’s work is important here because it looks at the inner psychology of these men rather than just judging their behavior. He describes the Manosphere as a fantasy space where men act out their frustrated desires and aggressive impulses. The main idea is "dis/inhibition": these men feel powerless and inhibited in real life—in their jobs and relationships—but they feel completely free and "disinhibited" online. In digital spaces, attacking women becomes a way to release tension without facing consequences. This creates a strange paradox where these men see themselves as weak victims, yet they constantly dream of having total control and causing destruction. Johanssen highlights a classic dynamic found in the work of Freud and Reich: repressed desire doesn’t just go away; it turns into symbolic violence. Misogyny doesn’t happen because these men don’t want women, but because their desire feels humiliated—as if it were stolen by feminism or modern society. The stories told in the Manosphere act as a defense: they paint women as manipulative and men as victims. Johanssen avoids simply judging these men; instead, he tries to understand the mechanics behind their behavior, which confirms Reich’s old ideas. The Manosphere is like a collection of "armored bodies" where blocked energy turns into resentment and fanaticism. Online hatred becomes a substitute for a healthy sexual life—a response to a feeling of powerlessness in the real world. Technology doesn’t create this problem, but it makes it worse because algorithms reward extreme views, and modern culture leaves people feeling isolated. The Manosphere gives these men a ready-made identity built on hate instead of happiness. Ultimately, online misogyny is a sign that traditional masculinity is in crisis. Just as Reich explained in The Mass Psychology of Fascism, people under pressure need an enemy to blame for their own frustrations. Today, that enemy is often the independent, free woman. Her freedom makes the "armored" man’s own repression feel unbearable, so his anxiety turns into organized hatred. With the "Telemachus complex," Massimo Recalcati describes a generation that doesn’t rebel against the father but suffers because he is missing. This "evaporated father" is unable to provide the guidance or rules that allow desire to grow in a healthy way. For Reich, old-fashioned authority created "armor," but today, it is emotional emptiness that makes people feel cold and stiff. The "incel" is someone who wants real physical connection but lives entirely online, which leads to constant frustration. In this context, misogyny is not just random hatred; it is a defense against the pain of failed desire. When a real father figure is missing, men look for imaginary ones: digital gurus, toxic online communities, and hateful ideologies. these act as a "digital father" that provides rigid and punishing rules instead of support. This confirms an idea shared by both Reich and Recalcati: without a healthy structure to make pleasure possible, pleasure itself causes anxiety, and desire turns into bitterness. This also relates to Jacques Lacan’s concept of "Surplus Enjoyment." Just like the Marxist idea of surplus value in the economy, this theory suggests that while a small minority seems to have "unlimited pleasure," the majority feels completely deprived. This sense of unfairness is what consumes the minds of "incels" all over the world. In his collection of articles called Lutheran Letters, the writer Pier Paolo Pasolini writes a short guide on teaching and life through the "Letters to Gennariello." In these letters, Pasolini imagines a conversation with a young boy from Naples named Gennariello. He describes the boy as a cheerful "rogue"—someone who is a bit casual and rebellious but also intelligent and kind-hearted. Pasolini argues that being from Naples makes it impossible for the boy to be unpleasant, even if he comes from a middle-class background. He calls Naples the "last great village," a place where everyone, rich or poor, is still full of natural vitality and life. This comparison is important: while the young men in Pasolini’s other stories are often poor, violent, or even sexist, they are different from Reich’s "armored" men. They still have a raw, human energy that hasn’t been completely crushed by modern society. These young men have bodies that are active and alive, even if they are complicated. Pasolini saw in them a natural energy that hadn’t been fully trapped by consumerism or strict rules yet. Their bad behavior was real and sometimes brutal, but it wasn’t part of a rigid, organized ideology. Today, however, the man in the Manosphere is often "disembodied"—meaning he lives in his head and online, far away from real-life experiences. While the kids in Pasolini’s world lived out a raw, messy, and physical sexuality on the streets, the man in the Manosphere lives out an abstract sexuality based on fantasies and computer algorithms. In Reich’s terms, this move from the streets to the internet marks the shift from a physical kind of rebellion to a purely ideological one. To understand the Incel phenomenon, it is not enough to just look at the internet or treat it as a simple mental health issue. We have to look at a deeper problem that Pier Paolo Pasolini explained very clearly: the failure of education to teach us about desire and the human body.

In his writing, Pasolini speaks to a young boy from Naples, but he is actually talking to an entire generation. He warns that we have replaced true education with mere "training" and "conformity." This new type of social power doesn’t use force to control people; instead, it uses temptation, consumerism, and the pressure to be "normal."

This is where the connection to Wilhelm Reich is very clear. Reich showed how strict, authoritarian parents and teachers created "armored" bodies and angry people who were easy to control. Pasolini takes this a step further: he observes that the strict father is gone, but he has been replaced by something worse—the anonymous power of the media and the obsession with buying things. There is no longer a real person to teach us; there is only the pressure to fit in.

The "Incel" is a direct result of this failed education. He didn’t grow up under a strong authority, but in an educational void. Just like Pasolini’s character Gennariello, the Incel was shaped by the media—first by TV and then by the internet. He learned a version of success and manhood where desire is just a performance, without ever getting a real emotional or physical education. In his writings, Pasolini warns of a power that teaches us without admitting it: consumerism shapes our desires by promising freedom, but it never teaches us about limits, patience, or real relationships. In this empty space, the Incel identity is born. Wilhelm Reich’s ideas explain the psychology behind this: when sexual energy cannot find a healthy outlet, it doesn’t just disappear; it hardens into "character armor." For the Incel, this armor isn’t caused by someone saying "no," but by a broken promise of happiness. Herbert Marcuse called this "repressive tolerance"—a society that tells you to be sexually free but actually creates new types of anxiety. Pasolini called this "cultural genocide," where real people and traditions are replaced by fake, identical copies. While the street kids in Pasolini’s early stories were often violent, they were still physically present in the real world. In contrast, today’s Incel is passive, raised on digital images and social competition. His hatred of women doesn’t come from old-fashioned strict rules, but from an education that turned desire into a product and the body into a performance. Women become the target because they represent a human reality that cannot be controlled. In this way, Incel communities act like a "school in reverse.": Where education should have taught us how to relate to our bodies and to others, a toxic "self-education" based on anger and ideology has taken its place. Both Wilhelm Reich and Pier Paolo Pasolini reach the same conclusion: without learning how to handle desire, true freedom cannot exist. Instead, new types of control and authority emerge.

In this sense, the Incel is not a rebel. He is the result of a society that claims to be "tolerant" but actually forces people to follow a certain idea of "freedom." This pressure to have a "perfect" and "free" sex life actually creates the same kind of psychological armor that Reich once blamed on strict, intolerant societies. Basically, being forced to be "free" can make people just as repressed and angry as being forced to be "obedient."

Bibliografia:

1. Banet-Weiser, S., Gill, R., & Rottenberg, C. (2020). Postfeminism and Paternalism: Popular Misogyny and the Manosphere. Feminist Theory, 21(3).
2. Bates, L. (2020). Men Who Hate Women: From Incels to Pickup Artists. Simon & Schuster.
3. Becker, H. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. Free Press.
4. Byung-Chul Han. (2015). The burnout society (E. Butler, Trans.). Stanford University Press.
5. Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. University of California Press.
6. Copland, S. J. (2024). The Male Complaint: The Manosphere and Misogyny Online. Polity Press.
7. Dikotomiko. (2025). Incel in a room: The cinema of ugly, lonely, and mean males. Shatter.
8. Fromm, E. (1973). The anatomy of human destructiveness. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
9. Ging, D. (2017). Alphas, Betas, and Incels: Theorizing the Manosphere. Men and Masculinities, 22(4).
10. Hebdige, D. (1979). Subculture: The Meaning of Style. Routledge.
11. Heritage, F. (2023). Incels and Ideologies: Rhetoric, Language and Masculinity. Springer.
12. Johanssen, J. (2021). Fantasy, Online Misogyny and the Manosphere: Male Bodies of Dis/Inhibition. Routledge.
13. Kimmel, M. (2013). Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era. Nation Books.
14. Lacan, J. (2024). The seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book XVI: From an Other to the other (B. Fink, Trans.). Polity Press.
15. Marcuse, H. (1964). One-dimensional man: Studies in the ideology of advanced industrial society. Beacon Press.
16. Pasolini, P. P. (1983). Lutheran letters (S. Hood, Trans.). Carcanet Press.
17. Recalcati, M. (2019). The Telemachus complex: Parents and children after the decline of the father (A. Kilgarriff, Trans.). Polity Press.
18. Reich, W. (1970). The mass psychology of fascism (V. R. Carfagno, Trans.). Farrar, Straus and Giroux. (Original work published 1933).
19. Reich, W. (1967). Reich speaks of Freud: Wilhelm Reich discusses his work and his relationship with Sigmund Freud (M. Higgins & C. M. Raphael, Eds.). Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
20. Reich, W. (1973). Ether, God and Devil / Cosmic superimposition. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
21. Reich, W. (1972). The sexual struggle of youth (A. S. Blackwell, Trans.). Socialist Reproduction.
22. Reich, W. (1983). Children of the future: On the prevention of sexual pathology (T. Pol, Trans.). Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
23. Sugiura, L. (2021). The Incel Rebellion: The Rise of the Manosphere and the Virtual War Against Women. Emerald.
24. Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs.