The New Way Young Boys Are Being Shamed - William Costello

Costello argues that sexual education in schools lacks any component about how to become attractive to the opposite sex. He points to Scott Galloway's insight that telling young men self-development (education, status, fitness) will help them succeed with women is an empowering message. However, framing self-improvement as a means to attract women can be seen as misogynistic, yet this very motivation is what keeps boys engaged. He suggests using the biographies of pickup artists who later found fulfillment in relationships (Neil Strauss, Tucker Max, Dan Bilzerian) as a credible trajectory — they've been there, done that, and declare it hollow. This bypasses the 'soft male role model' resistance. He also warns that defining masculinity so broadly that anything goes ('define it for yourself') leaves boys without guidance, making them easy prey for manosphere figures.

Costello discusses how the mating market is competitive, and women's selection places weight on appearance. He notes that there is a societal ick around men learning to improve their attractiveness, as if it's inauthentic. Yet women use makeup and cosmetic enhancements without that stigma. He argues that physical changes are more reliable than personality change, and that status accrual through consistency in work/education is another viable path. This protocol pushes back against the idea that women only value 'inner character' and acknowledges the tangible cues that drive attraction.

Costello recounts a debate in Qatar where a gay Lebanese man argued that masculinity was in too tight a box and needed to be blown open. Costello's response: if everything is masculinity, nothing is. Without some structure, boys get no guidance. He proposes agency as a flexible core — you can pursue arts, sports, career, but you must develop the capacity to act effectively. This acknowledges competitiveness and status hierarchies as real (women select on status), so lying to boys about them harms them. He insists that the days of labeling all traditional male traits as 'toxic' or 'far right' must end for any positive masculinity message to land.

Costello warns that making Adolescence a mandatory school viewing and parliamentary discussion may elevate a specific type of crime to notoriety, potentially inspiring imitation. He references Jake Davidson's videos being aired on Sky News and the United Healthcare CEO shooter's portrayal as a sex symbol, noting that spree killers often seek fame. The show, by being hailed as a national conversation starter, could give the impression that such an act guarantees massive attention, which is a dangerous precedent.

Costello mentions Jeffrey Miller, who wrote the book 'Mate' (the best men's dating advice book according to Costello) and ran an online call-in show with Tucker Max and Carin Perilloux to help young men in the early 2010s. He suggests that a sequel for long-term relationships would be valuable, especially given the rise of married red pill spaces that may have become toxic. He sees potential in translating EP's findings into actionable advice for maintaining attraction and partnership satisfaction.

Costello explains that the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a progressive organization, found higher admiration for Andrew Tate among Asian and Black boys than white boys (12% white approval). His own research confirms that incels are disproportionately non-white and have high rates of autism (30%). This complicates the racial framing of the show and suggests interventions must address these demographics and the mental health underpinnings, such as suicidality, which is vastly higher than the general population (30% daily suicidal thoughts vs. 5% annual in the general population). He argues the show ignored these realities, instead depicting a white, well-raised boy, which may misdirect public understanding and policy.

Costello's male sedation hypothesis posits that young men who might otherwise have been competing for status and mates through physical confrontation are now absorbed by online worlds, including pornography and gaming. These digital status games provide a substitute that reduces real-world aggression. He points out that there has been no documented case like the show's fictional murder — a 13-year-old white boy from a good family stabbing a girl because of incel ideology. The closest case, Jake Davidson, is very different. The hypothesis suggests we might be choosing a poison: if these online outlets were removed, we might see more real-world violence. Costello notes the show does the opposite, claiming "we thought they were safe in their room on their computer," but in reality they probably are safer there than on the streets.

Costello describes two tandem strategies: (1) lower women's self-perceived mate value so they settle for lower-status men, and (2) encourage rival males to take the black pill and exit the mating competition, reducing competition. He notes that this is analogous to how low mate value men in relationships attack their partner's self-esteem to prevent them from leaving. The anonymous online environment allows free-riding — spreading misogyny without personal reputational cost. He admits most incels seem to genuinely believe their ideology, but there could be a subset of dark triad men executing this consciously.

Costello notes that this concept creep creates a trap: if an incel ascends into a relationship, his ideology may lead him to never accept it as genuine, fueling dead bedroom narratives. He mentions a debate with an incel forum administrator who cited Reddit dead bedroom posts as evidence that the problem is pervasive, but Costello countered with data showing most couples have regular sex. This creep makes interventions harder because the pathology becomes self-sealing.

Costello's study showed that the general population and even non-feminist women have more sympathy for incels than incels believe. However, feminist women are an exception — incels are accurate about their animosity. He cautions that incels do face real hostility, citing the forum 'IncelTears' which had to ban encouraging suicide of incels. So while there is genuine abuse, incels amplify its prevalence, which may be a target for cognitive interventions.