University of Adelaide Archives

What happens when the manosphere goes to university

We are part of a broader research team* investigating how online worlds are shaping Australian schooling. It’s a timely issue floodlit by the Netflix drama Adolescence. In 2024, our study contributed to a flood of reportage and academic research concerning a rise in sexist and misogynistic encounters in Australian schools, and the broader social need for a coherent strategy around gender based violence (GBV) that challenges the power structures and rigid binary norms that underpin it.

Universities are spaces where this work is both needed and occurs.

What universities should do

As social institutions and major providers of education, universities can and should play a role in promoting long-term social and cultural change through supporting diversity and justice oriented research and teaching. Indeed, universities are not only where specialists like teachers, lawyers, journalists, and health professionals are prepared to work in society, but where GBV itself is occurring to the extent that the Federal Government recently released its Action Plan Addressing Gender-based Violence in Higher Education. This is a welcome development but does not mean that education around gender justice has been mainstreamed. Nor has it manifested in greater institutional support for academics who teach this complex terrain. In fact, our research indicates that academics teaching diversity-related content are experiencing a sharp rise in GBV and ‘anti-woke’ backlash.

The second phase of our research into digital worlds and their impacts on Australian classrooms turns to the university sector. It includes surveys and interviews with tertiary educators from across Australia. We ask if they have witnessed or experienced a rise in anti-social language or behaviours amongst tertiary students. Thus far, we have received 59 surveys and undertaken nine in-depth interviews, each approximately two hours long. While a modest sample, our data mirrors patterns playing out in schools and society more broadly.

Most phase two respondents are women or culturally minoritised academics from across disciplines (i.e., education, politics, journalism, business, human resource development, health, and humanities). They teach diversity content relating to racial and gender justice, LGBTQIA+ rights, multiculturalism, First Nations sovereignty, and religious inclusion. As a dispersed teaching body, these academics share stories of the emotional burdens of this work. They describe this as having grown harder recently, and often having deleterious impacts on student evaluations of teaching which affect academics’ health and career progression.

As a casual academic in education explained:

“Over the past three years behaviour has grown progressively worse from largely Anglo Australian cohorts of … young men. They watch sporting matches and do online betting during class … They do not like strong female tutors who talk about Aboriginal education or inclusion. [They] hide these sentiments until anonymous feedback is due. Then they write about the tutor being ‘dangerous’ and opinionated and say that politics shouldn’t be part of education.”

Academics across disciplines note diversity content is increasingly being framed by some students (and staff) as woke or politically extreme. The consequence for those who teach this content is a rise in feelings of precarity, anxiety, and frustration:

“I have stopped challenging students for fear of the feedback as I am on probation. I can’t do a good job ethically and morally. I don’t want to teach any more.”

Student evaluations are a real problem in this context. They have always been problematic. But with an ever more polarised discourse and the necessity to take firmer stands in class which make you inevitably unpopular with some students it is now completely unacceptable for universities to continue using these tools to evaluate performance.

LGBTQIA+ and Gender Equity Backlash

Australian academics also speak of a rise in anti-LGBTQIA+ backlash and pushback against gender equity specifically:

“Every year I consider just not teaching anything about gender equality or diversity, to avoid the grief. But on I go …

The anti-LGBTIQA+ backlash from students really shook me … There have been several examples of transphobia, homophobia, and misogyny in my classes especially in recent years, managing these interactions in class is getting increasingly difficult as opinions are becoming more polarised.

Just last week, a student expressed their opinion that it was ok to persecute lesbian and gay people because “they do not have children and contribute nothing to society, just like childless, single straight women” and therefore do not ‘deserve the protection of the law’.”

Lack of institutional and policy support

When asked if they feel supported by their institutions or what, specifically, is being done when challenging encounters arise, most respondents describe feeling insufficiently supported or institutionally gaslit, saying “nothing is ever done. Complaints get swept under the rug.” And “staff who experience bullying, harassment or mistreatment are made to feel they don’t know how to handle the situation.” Academics collectively speak of feeling alone, experiencing anxiety, and exhaustion.

But institutional inaction around GBV or anti-diversity backlash in classrooms links to a broader history of policy failure. This contributes to workplace cultures in which responses to such incidents are often ineffectual, absent, piecemeal, or left to individual teachers to resolve. This happens in schools and in universities. As funding to universities has been reduced, the higher education sector has grown more ‘masculinist’ and ‘business-like’. Courses centring diversity content are less institutionally prized than, for instance, the industry-aligned ‘hard’ sciences. This means academics who teach diversity content may often be working in isolation.

This also comes at a time when the manosphere (online groups unified by anti-feminist, right-wing populism) is shaping gender and racial politics worldwide through circulating extreme beliefs that many Gen Z boys and young men, in particular, are taking to be true. Common manosphere messaging includes the idea that feminism is a conspiracy, immigrants and cultural minorities are threats, social problems such as poverty or insecure housing are the result of women and minority groups advancing at men’s expense, and LGBTQIA+ people and single unmarried women are a threat to the natural order.

Universities are some of the last places where informed social critique and engagement across differences is nurtured. These are vital elements of a healthy democracy. Formal education should provide strong intellectual resistance to the polarised beliefs currently being amplified by digital worlds. Simply banning social media is insufficient. Yet, women and minority academics are increasingly carrying this work alone. They report feeling isolated, burnt out, and targeted by students labelling them ‘woke’ or ‘politically extreme’ – dynamics that will undoubtedly intensify with the Trump Administration’s blatant ‘war on woke’. Education is political and backlash against diversity is becoming extreme. Education must be part of the solution. Diversity work including gender justice must be valued as a core curriculum mandate across Australia’s pre-tertiary and tertiary education fields. Our social fabric depends on it.

* Professor Ed Palmer, Dr Eszter Szenes and Dr Daniel Lee all contributed to the research on which this article is based. Research ethics approval #2024-017.

Sam Schulz is an associate professor and sociologist of education at The University of Adelaide. Sarah McDonald is a lecturer at the Centre for Research in Education & Social Inclusion in UniSA Education Futures, University of South Australia.

The header image is from the Netflix series Adolescence

Inclusive education: it’s not getting better. What should we do next?

For decades, debates around inclusive education have persisted, with systems globally striving to make schools more inclusive. Yet, how much progress has truly been made? Despite years of reform and substantial financial investment, increasing numbers of students are being excluded or removed from schools. In Australia, no state or territory government has fully committed to inclusive schooling. That leaves the responsibility for inclusion largely on individual schools. In the ongoing debate, the founding principles of inclusion have been overshadowed, despite our classrooms being more diverse than ever.

Interpretations vary

Interpretations of inclusive education vary. In its purest form, inclusion means that all students are educated at their local school. However, this is far more complex in practice. Many schools that claim to be fully inclusive are, in reality, operating under models resembling the integration strategies of the 1980s and 1990s rather than true inclusion. To be “included” implies being part of or brought into something. Yet we rarely ask whether what we are including students into is actually worthwhile. While inclusive education offers clear benefits, there is an urgent need to shift our focus away from the notion of inclusion to providing a good education for all.

Reflecting on the current state of education, it is evident that the vision of inclusion has fallen short. It has also become narrowly associated with accommodating students with disabilities. The current model of inclusive education is not just limited, it is flawed. School leaders and teachers are under immense pressure. In many cases they are expected to meet the needs of all students without adequate knowledge or support. Many schools attempt to implement inclusive education using an outdated integration model, rather than working to establish inclusion as the usual way of doing things. This can leave teachers working in isolation to navigate the complexities of making lessons more inclusive, manage challenging classroom behaviours, whilst also improving academic outcomes. This balancing act is unsustainable, and often leads to burnout, frustration, and negative attitudes among educators. At its worst, it leads to attrition.

Is inclusive education attainable?

A huge burden has been placed at the feet of school leaders and teachers. Schools are expected to meet the needs of all students with an education system premised on structures not all that far removed from what they were many decades ago. School leaders and teachers want students to succeed. But they are struggling to figure out how to meet the increasingly diverse needs of students within a system that expects continuous improvement in academic outcomes while providing limited resources.

Evidence suggests that increasing student engagement is key to improving outcomes for all students. Yet, school leaders and teachers are faced with ever increasing rates of scrutiny, standardisation and accountability. This is a result of systems operating within a neoliberal paradigm that often seems more focused on metrics than on the provision of good education. Headlines frequently highlight the failures of schools and apportion blame to poor leadership and teaching.

Like integration in the 1980s, the notion of inclusion as it stands now carries with it baggage attached to years of heated debate and very public failures. We argue that inclusive education, within the current educational zeitgeist, is an illusion. Today, more students are being suspended and excluded than ever before. Homeschooling numbers are rising. Teachers are leaving the profession in droves. And school leaders are experiencing harmful levels of stress. Now is the time to move beyond inclusion.

Illuminating good education

It is time to shift our focus to what truly matters – providing a good education to all students. Rather than clinging to the illusion of inclusion, let’s take this opportunity to rethink our education system. A broader, more responsive and flexible approach is needed, one that genuinely serves the diversity of all students. This requires rethinking policies, providing better support for teachers, and ensuring that schools are adequately resourced.

The notion of a good education prompts us to consider the very purpose of education. What do we hope to achieve with compulsory education? How can we ensure that every student benefits from their schooling experience? At its core, the purpose of education is to prepare students for life beyond the classroom. Education should aim to foster a love of learning, encourage curiosity, and help students develop the skills they need to navigate an ever-changing world.

Moving forward

We need a shift in mindset and we need to stop thinking about inclusive education as something to be implemented or attained. We need to stop framing it as one policy agenda that is often in conflict with other educational reforms. Repositioning the debate to one centred on good education asks us to step back and see the bigger picture. It forces us to bring together the various components of education that are too often managed in silos and view it as a single construct.

Governments around the world need to rethink the way they ‘do’ schooling. This means overhauling outdated structures, processes and models of practice. It requires a change at every level, from school design to curriculum development to assessment requirements. Funding models need to be restructured to ensure all students have access to the resources they need. Governments need to work with universities as both research partners and teacher education providers. Voices of communities are fundamental to this conversation, allowing for dialogue to co-create powerful educational policies that can drive sustainable change.

The next challenge

The challenge to move from a debate around inclusive education to one that centres on a good education is significant. But so is the opportunity. Leaders and teachers require policies, resources, and supports necessary to respond to the needs of all students in an equitable way. Prioritising a good education for every child and young person can ensure each student is given an opportunity to thrive. This notion can no longer be positioned as an illusion. With changes to the structures of schooling, it becomes a realistic and achievable goal. Perhaps more importantly, it becomes a moral imperative.

From left to right: Christopher Boyle is Professor of Inclusion and Educational Psychology and the Associate Head (Research) in the School of Education at the University of Adelaide. Joanna Anderson is an associate professor in inclusive education and educational leadership and Associate Head (Learning and Teaching) in the School of Education at the University of Adelaide. Tom Porta is a lecturer and Master of Education Program Director at the University of Adelaide.