(p.3)
Concern about men's media behavior is widespread. There's worry about online influencers peddling misogyny and retrograde masculinities, a so-called manosphere (see Louis Theroux's documentary Into the Manosphere). There's worry about problematic porn usage, and how it associates with depression and anxiety and sexual and relationship dysfunction. There's gamer culture, with its well-documented misogynies, and, more generally, social media and its effect on men's mental health, body image, body modification, eating behavior, and more.
Underlying this concern is a feeling that men are not OK. There's also a fear that, when men are not OK, they may choose to work it out with dominance, control, and violence: violence against women, violence against other men. This threatens everyone's flourishing. Peace, harmony, and prosperity retreat, on the scale of individual relationships and households, and on the scale of nations. And the slow, steady progress toward gender equality enjoyed in many places in the world flags.
There is truth in these concerns, feelings, and fears. Flourishing is out of reach for too many men today, and this can lead to a sense of grievance. But it's also out of reach for too many women.
What stands out from this research is just how similar men and women are, overall, in how they perceive flourishing and their capacity to realize it. It's not that one gender or the other is doing emotion, connection, or some other thing wrong, which requires fixing. Rather, each gender is experiencing gaps in their flourishing, which they respond to and seek support for in different ways, including through media and online engagement.
This report focuses on men in the U.S., contextualized in relationship to women, in order to understand how they perceive and experience their own flourishing, their own identities, relationships, and responsibilities; how they engage with media that represents, complicates, and contributes to their flourishing; and what this means for people and organizations wanting to support men in their journey toward a more loving, equal future.
Sources cited on p.3 (footnoted references, as hyperlinks in the original): Louis Theroux's Into the Manosphere (Wikipedia) · researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk (problematic pornography use across countries, genders, and sexual orientations) · psychologytoday.com (impact of problematic pornography use in men) · theconversation.com (pornography causes lasting harm to brain and relationships) · theguardian.com/games (video games industry and sexism) · theguardian.com/media (excessive social media harms teen mental health) · psychologytoday.com (social media and body dissatisfaction in men) · better.org.uk (men's mental health report) · pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12901182.
(p.4)
Harmony Labs partnered with LinkUp Lab to map audiences of men online: how they participate in media cultures; relate to different masculinities; and see themselves, relationships, communities; + how this contributes to their flourishing.
(p.5)
To map audiences along key tensions in flourishing baselines, attitudes, values, media behaviors, and more, the study combined survey, opt-in media panel data, and content testing. The study period for the streaming media and porn analysis was June through December 2025. The YouTube analysis study period was January through December 2025. The survey fielded in the third quarter of 2025. Content testing was conducted between December 2025 and February 2026.
Study components (infographic, p.5 — reconstructed as a list):
(Note: the source renders this as a set of numbered icons/stat callouts around a central "methods overview" graphic rather than a table; the pairing of some numbers to labels above is inferred from adjacency in the layout and may not be pixel-exact — see conversion notes.)
(p.6)
Flourishing dimensions and how men and women relate to them and to media; some features of men's media; 5 audiences of men and how they engage with porn, and with "manosphere" content on YouTube + how it affects them.
5 beliefs signal flourishing for women and men (p.7)
Flourishing is a well-researched psychometric concept. In a 2021 paper, Ekman and Simon-Thomas define it as "an overarching quality of life, 'the good life,' grounded in everyday connection, positivity, and resilience . . . key to lifelong health and well-being."
To represent flourishing in this study, the researchers landed on 5 beliefs that capture the needs and tensions people of all gender identities experience with respect to living their best lives, used as a narrative goal to evaluate whether and how media moves men in the "right" direction:
The baseline survey identified gaps of 5+ points between men and women on two dimensions of flourishing: bridging (men +5) and mutuality (women +7).
Table — Agreement with each flourishing belief, women vs. men (bar chart, p.7)
| Belief | Women | Men | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agency | 55% | 57% | Men +2 |
| Resilience | 67% | 69% | Men +2 |
| Bridging | 64% | 69% | Men +5 |
| Connection | 53% | 54% | Men +1 |
| Mutuality | 77% | 70% | Women +7 |
Source cited on p.7: researchgate.net/publication/352058402 (Teaching the Science of Human Flourishing: Unlocking Connection, Positivity and Resilience for the Greater Good).
More on flourishing correlates (p.8)
The study also tested agreement among men and women with concepts correlated and more or less central to the five flourishing dimensions, listed below in order of descending centrality (as presented in the source). The biggest differences between men and women are around turning to close friends for support (women +24) and being comfortable asking for support (women +15) — highlighted in the original as the largest gaps. Having kids is another area of significant difference: on average, men are 12+ points higher in associating having and raising kids with the good life, and 2+ points higher in seeing supporting a family or community as a life path.
Table — Agreement with flourishing-correlated statements, women vs. men
| Statement | Women | Men | M–F difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Helping others meaningfully | 77% | 73% | −4% |
| Comfortable asking for support | 62% | 47% | −15% |
| Turn to close friends for support | 73% | 49% | −24% |
| Prioritize meaningful friendships | 76% | 69% | −7% |
| Turn to mentors/allies for support | 66% | 62% | −4% |
| Confident finding romantic partners | 69% | 68% | −1% |
| Celebrate others' success | 82% | 78% | −4% |
| Work with people who disagree | 76% | 72% | −4% |
| Willing to take risks | 57% | 64% | +7% |
| Has enough meaning in life | 74% | 73% | −1% |
| Discuss differences calmly | 70% | 67% | −3% |
| Having/caring for a spouse | 69% | 66% | −3% |
| Feel in control of life | 70% | 68% | −2% |
| Raising kids important to good life | 55% | 67% | +12% |
| Turn to family for support | 88% | 84% | −4% |
| Support family/community as life path | 76% | 78% | +2% |
| Self-description/admired traits match | 95% | 91% | −4% |
| Turn to therapy for support | 46% | 38% | −8% |
| Shares deepest thoughts/feelings openly | 52% | 59% | +7% |
| Have female friends | 75% | 62% | −13% |
| Have male friends | 60% | 79% | +19% |
(The source chart marks this list as running from "central to flourishing" at the top to "correlated but less central" at the bottom; the exact row where that boundary falls isn't marked in extractable text.)
Different media move men and women differently (p.9)
Clips from 8 shows — NCIS, The Lion King, Queer Eye, Tulsa King, Brooklyn 99, Everybody Hates Chris, Landman, Dandadan — were used to field-test how media moved 2,800 people on agreement with the five flourishing beliefs and on emotional affect. Most of the clips that yielded positive movement for men, against all flourishing beliefs, yielded negative movement for women, and vice versa — like Queer Eye, which positively affected women and negatively affected men, or NCIS, which positively affected men and negatively affected women.
Only The Lion King clip tested — Simba talking to the spirit of his father Mufasa, guided by Rafiki — produced positive movement for both men and women, and an increase in broadening emotions. (Image caption on p.9, rendered reversed in the source text layer: "Image source: Lion King clip, YouTube.")
Additional content testing confirmed that gender-specific effects from media are the rule, not the exception — which speaks against using one's own responses to media to predict the responses of people with different gender identities.
Protagonist-audience gender match in media: lightly preferred (p.10)
The 100 most-engaged-with streaming programs from the study period were sampled and coded for protagonist gender: 42 with men protagonists, 24 with women protagonists, and the rest with mixed-gender ensemble casts or no clear protagonist. More people watch male protagonists overall because there are more of them, but the data also shows a slight preference for protagonist-audience gender matches — female audiences slightly prefer content with female protagonists, and male audiences show a slight preference for male protagonists.
Table — Daily average reach by protagonist gender and audience gender (bar chart, p.10)
| Women audience | Men audience | |
|---|---|---|
| Male protagonists — daily average reach | 44% | 50% |
| Female protagonists — daily average reach | 27% | 20% |
Clearly protagonist gender is just one element of what audiences look for in the streaming stories they choose to engage with.
Action and crisis resolution drive men's streaming (p.11)
The streaming content that attracts men and women is distinct. In general, women are slightly more likely to seek stories exploring relationships and emotional interiority that take characters from OK to flourishing. Men are a little more likely to seek out stories about externalities, like navigating broken systems, with protagonists taking decisive action to resolve specific threats or crises — content that often shows characters and worlds moving from bad to better, but rarely all the way to flourishing. This might look like facing physical or existential threats, as in a criminal network in Reacher or The Equalizer, or fighting for survival in Squid Game, or navigating elite gatekeeping in Crazy Rich Asians, or oppressive regimes in Andor.
Interest, amusement, joy + pride feature in men's streaming (p.12)
For men, when streaming media depicts flourishing, characters embody joy, amusement, interest, or pride — positive emotions stemming from progress toward goals, safe social incongruity, novelty and mystery, and a job well done, respectively. Trust, safety, and space to be vulnerable are earned through competence, rather than something characters just show up to the party with (examples cited: The Blacklist, Into the Spider-Verse, Landman, Deadpool).
Characters in the media women choose, by contrast, embody positive emotions like hope and love, stemming from belief in a better day and connection with others — it's the connection itself that transforms. Many stories with strong cross-gender appeal, like The Last of Us, use high-stakes externalities, like existential threat, to drive connection and relationship transformation, which, in turn, heightens survival skill.
5 audiences of men, defined by flourishing baselines, values, media behaviors, attitudes to gender, relationships + more (p.13)
In order to understand the attitudes and media choices of men more deeply, the study segments them into five audiences, dividing along key tensions in flourishing baselines, attitudes, values, and media behaviors, arranged along an x–y values axis: a collective focus on the left ("We") and an individualist focus on the right ("Me"), and a predilection for stability and tradition down below ("Protect & Preserve") and for creativity and innovation up on top ("Strive & Create"). Each audience is sized according to the percentage of men in a nationally representative survey.
| Audience | Size | Quadrant |
|---|---|---|
| Hold the Line | 29% | We / Protect & Preserve |
| Locked In | 23% | Me / Protect & Preserve |
| In It Together | 21% | We / Strive & Create |
| Mr Fixit | 16% | Me / Protect & Preserve |
| Sacred Duty | 11% | We / Protect & Preserve (duty-oriented) |
Men's behavior on YouTube does not yield a manosphere shaped like a rabbit hole or a coherent monoculture of content (p.14)
The study explored whether it could derive from the YouTube behaviors of audiences in the media panel a "manosphere" — a coherent monoculture or rabbit hole of misogyny and gender grievance content men risk falling into online. It started from 8 YouTube channels whose content reliably features misogyny and gender grievance, then spun out networks according to the engagement behaviors of men in the panel, showing which channel engagements co-occur on the same day with anchor-channel engagements.
The networks that emerged were more diverse in content than one might expect from a rabbit hole: most men engaging these eight channels also consumed all sorts of other media, like CNN, Fox News, Saturday Night Live, or ESPN — all with much higher average daily reach and more varied in their views on women and masculinity. This is not to diminish the negative effects of content proximate to the eight anchor channels: of the 32 YouTube video clips tested, content close in the network to these anchor channels was 8x more likely to decrease broadening emotions and 3x more likely to increase narrowing emotions and decrease agreement with the flourishing beliefs. (See "A Manosphere on YouTube?" below for the full analysis.)
Companion report for porn engagement by audience (p.15)
The self-reported centrality of porn to men's online experiences is well documented, yet there is little cross-platform, internet-scale information about porn engagement. So a companion analysis looked into online porn behaviors for each audience (published separately as How Men Engage with Porn Online, harmonylabs.org/project/pornography-research).
What stood out across all of men's media engagement, including porn, was the space media affords for exploring, reflecting on, and reinforcing formulations of and attitudes about masculinity, replete with all its desires, fears, and fascinations. One audience (Hold the Line) tends to hold so-called "traditional family values" and gravitates to stories that resolve in men taking control in difficult situations, often as family providers and protectors; in their porn, infidelity initiated by wives and watched by husbands is a key theme. This audience reports relationship failure as a change catalyst more frequently than other men — fear and fascination with failing at traditional gender norms and becoming a cuckold clearly preoccupy this audience.
(This page also contains a circular infographic reprising porn-engagement statistics from the companion report — average daily reach by age group, average session duration of 10 minutes, average porn pages per session, etc. — already covered in detail in the companion report, "How Men Engage with Porn Online.")
Inside the action, men being men together, without reference to masculinity (p.16)
32 video clips representing the range of YouTube content that engages men were tested, looking for videos that increased broadening emotions, decreased narrowing emotions, and increased agreement with the flourishing belief statements. Much of what was tested increased narrowing emotions and decreased broadening emotions. From the content that reliably produced positive effects in men, three observations stood out:
(See "Audience Effects" below for the full breakdown with examples.)
A theme in men's media (p.17)
A theme in men's media is the search for role models, for this or that skill, for whatever needs fixing or improving before the desired thing happens, and the good life begins. But skills are built through relationships, not before them, and relationships usually work best IRL. Is there a role for media to play in springing this trap?
(p.18)
Representing the range of how men perceive and experience flourishing, gender identities and roles, relationships and responsibilities; and how they engage with media that represents, complicates, and contributes to flourishing.
Organized by values (p.19)
The five audience segments divide along key tensions in flourishing baselines, media behaviors, attitudes to gender, relationships, responsibilities, and more, organized according to values, using the Narrative Observatory values architecture (derived from the work of Shalom Schwartz), arranged along an x–y values axis: a collective focus on the left ("We") and an individualist focus on the right ("Me"); a predilection for stability and tradition down below ("Protect & Preserve") and for creativity and innovation up on top ("Strive & Create"). Each audience is sized according to the percentage of men in the nationally representative survey, and audiences are presented throughout the report in order of size.
Meet the audiences (p.20)
| Audience | Size | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Hold the Line | 29% | Provider, protector. Service and faith are the way — feeding the homeless, caring for elders, setting up what comes next. Skews older, lower income, likely to have been parents. |
| Locked In | 23% | Self-reliant, self-made, competing to make it and build something real. Skews younger, secular, single, non-parents, especially likely to be men of color. |
| In It Together | 21% | Community-oriented, empathetic, can't look away from what's broken, though can't always see a path to fix it. Skews college-educated, secular, Democrat or Independent. |
| Mr Fixit | 16% | Adaptive problem solvers, thriving in work and family, with a knack for making things better. Everything is figure-out-able. Skews older, heterosexual, church-going, Republican. |
| Sacred Duty | 11% | Holds things together, delivers. Loyalty and discipline are core virtues. Skews older, heterosexual, religious, Republican. |
Flourishing baselines by audience (p.21)
One of the key dividing lines between audiences is how they score on the 5 flourishing dimensions, relative to the average for all audiences of men. Locked In struggles with agency, connection, and mutuality, compared to other men. Hold the Line struggles with mutuality, bridging, and connection. In It Together struggles with agency and resilience. Mr Fixit struggles with resilience and bridging. Sacred Duty scores highest across almost all dimensions, surpassed only by Hold the Line on agency and by In It Together on mutuality.
Table — Flourishing score, relative to the all-audience average, by dimension (line chart, p.21; values read directly from the chart's data-point labels)
| Dimension | Hold the Line | Locked In | In It Together | Mr Fixit | Sacred Duty |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agency | +4 | −2 | −9 | 0 | +3 |
| Resilience | +1 | 0 | −1 | −3 | +6 |
| Bridging | −2 | +2 | (not separately labeled — see note) | −3 | +4 |
| Connection | −2 | (not separately labeled — see note) | +1 | 0 | +11 |
| Mutuality | −5 | −3 | +10 | +1 | +9 |
(Two data points — In It Together's bridging score and Locked In's connection score — overlap with a neighboring label in the source chart and aren't independently numbered; the qualitative summary above still applies.)
Gender + relationship attitudes by audience (p.22)
Another key dividing line among audiences is attitudes related to masculinity, gender roles, and relationship commitment. The source presents this as a "subway map"-style diagram, with each audience's position, per attitude dimension, falling at a left ("progressive"), middle, or right ("more conservative") stop:
| Dimension | Left (progressive) | Middle | Right (more conservative) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Masculinity — left: "I strive for generosity, friendliness, care. It's easy to make women friends. I reject the idea that men work harder than women." Right: "I strive for confidence, strength, wealth, respect. Friendship with women is complicated. Men work harder than women." | In It Together, Sacred Duty | (no audience) | Locked In, Hold the Line, Mr Fixit |
| Gender roles — left: "Every family decides and does what works for them." Right: "Men are responsible for providing and creating joy. Women nurture." | In It Together | Sacred Duty, Locked In | Hold the Line, Mr Fixit |
| Commitment — left: "I like to keep my options open and admire people who change to stay true to themselves." Right: "I'm looking for one person to build a life with and admire those who stay true to what and whom they care for." | In It Together, Locked In | (no audience) | Sacred Duty, Hold the Line, Mr Fixit |
"Provider, protector, rooted in faith and family" (p.23–26)
We hold things together. We deliver. Loyalty and discipline are key, in a world marked by threat and scarcity. We believe men and women have different strengths and work to do. Our flourishing gap is bridging, connection, and mutuality — working with, supporting, and uplifting others.
In their own words: "Faith and discipline are all I need. No one but me will provide for my own."
(Image caption on p.23, rendered reversed in the source text layer: "Image source: Blue Bloods.")
Media diet — "Reluctant protector" (p.24)
The story pattern in Hold the Line's streaming media looks like a wounded, isolated professional pulled into someone else's crisis. Through protecting the vulnerable, they reconnect with purpose, form meaningful bonds, and reclaim agency. The external mission heals the internal wound.
Strength: "Protects and provides" — defining belief: "Men and women have fundamentally different strengths." (p.25)
Demographic highlights (donut charts, reconstructed from the source infographic)
| Age | Race | Place | Marital status | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18–29 | 21% | White | 68% | Suburban | 46% | Married | 51% |
| 30–44 | 27% | Black | 12% | Urban | 35% | Single | 35% |
| 45–64 | 35% | Latino | 9% | Rural | 19% | Divorced | 12% |
| 65+ | 18% | Other | 11% | Other | 2% |
Education: 53% no college, 14% 2-yr degree, 33% 4-yr degree. Parents: 58% parents, 23% parents with kids under 18. Religion: 32% attend church, 34% Christian. Party: 43% Republican, 29% Independent, 14% Democrat.
Key attitudes: 42% name "me and my family" as beneficiaries of the work they do in life; 8% trust themselves for information vs. 5% of other men; 12% trust Trump to deliver on promises vs. 8% of other men; admire conservative leaders more than other men (Trump 17% vs. 10%; Reagan 9% vs. 5%); want to be "strong and commanding," "a leader, wise in decision making."
On traits they admire in people: "Stoic, witty, disciplined, respectful, mentally tough, observant, grounded in purpose."
On a person they admire and why: "Dwight Eisenhower because practical and steady and served his country with discipline and integrity."
Flourishing gap — bridging, connection, mutuality (p.26)
Hold the Line doesn't struggle to act or recover from setbacks — compared to other audiences, they score high on agency and resilience. On average, compared to all audiences, they lag on bridging and connection and struggle with mutuality, or showing up for other people's wins. Compared to women, they lag on mutuality by −12 points. This gap in mutuality correlates to a model of manhood built around provision and protection, where someone else's success can feel like a zero-sum event rather than something to celebrate.
Table — Flourishing agreement, Hold the Line vs. all audiences (bar chart, p.26)
| Dimension | Hold the Line | All audiences |
|---|---|---|
| Agency | 70% | 65% |
| Resilience | 70% | 68% |
| Bridging | 61% | 67% |
| Connection | 52% | 57% |
| Mutuality | 54% | 69% |
(Bar pairs are read left-to-right from the chart; the source doesn't explicitly caption which bar is which, so pairing is inferred from context and the surrounding text about Hold the Line's relative strengths and gaps — treat exact values as approximate.)
"Self-made, self-reliant, plays hard" (p.27–30)
We're looking to build something real, for a reason to look up from the grind, in a world where men have to work hard, and no one hands you anything. We don't shy away from conflict, but can avoid closeness. Our flourishing gap is in agency, connection, and mutuality.
In their own words: "No one really gets me, so I'm gonna get mine on my own. They won't even see me coming."
(Image caption on p.27, rendered reversed in the source text layer: "Image source: The Boys.")
Media diet — "Misfit who finally belongs" (p.28)
The story pattern in Locked In's streaming media is a character cast out, estranged, or fundamentally other, whom crisis forces to find their true self and sometimes their tribe. By confronting past trauma and embracing their singularity, they discover they were always meant to belong. Their difference is their gift.
Strength: "Builds their own way" — defining belief: "I keep pushing for what I need even when people get uncomfortable." (p.29)
Demographic highlights
| Age | Race | Place | Marital status | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18–29 ★ | 26% | White | 64% | Suburban | 49% | Married | 44% |
| 30–44 | 32% | Black ★ | 12% | Urban ★ | 38% | Single ★ | 45% |
| 45–64 | 31% | Latino | 11% | Rural | 13% | Divorced | 10% |
| 65+ | 11% | Other | 13% | Other | 1% |
(★ = flagged in the source as a distinctive demographic trait for this audience.)
Education: 51% no college, 10% 2-yr degree, 39% 4-yr degree. Parents: 44% parents, 23% parents with kids under 18. Religion: 22% attend church, 16% Christian. Party: 40% Democrat, 29% Independent, 26% Republican.
Key attitudes: Believe that men have it harder than women, and men should be providers; 31% name "me" as beneficiaries of the work they do — the highest of any audience; 24% distrust the people who are supposed to hold others accountable vs. 16% of other men; 22% say nobody is accountable; want to be a "self-starter and independent," "strong & self-made," "flexible & free."
On traits they admire in people: "Cunning, intelligence, wisdom, observant, astuteness."
On a person they admire and why: "Elon Musk because he is an innovative entrepreneur who has changed the world through his work in space exploration, electric cars, and renewable energy."
Flourishing gap — agency, connection, mutuality (p.30)
Locked In lags the most of any audience on flourishing dimensions. The one dimension they lead on is bridging, which suggests they don't avoid conflict. They do, however, avoid closeness, tying Hold the Line for the lowest connection score across audiences. Their mutuality score is among the lowest, a full −11 points below women. Their sense of agency is also low. Low connection and mutuality scores do not mean they don't feel things — rather, they have learned, probably through experience, that needing people and being needed are liabilities. Their self-sufficiency reads like an adaptive response.
Table — Flourishing agreement, Locked In vs. all audiences
| Dimension | Locked In | All audiences |
|---|---|---|
| Agency | 55% | 66% |
| Resilience | 57% | 68% |
| Bridging | 70% | 69% |
| Connection | 52% | 57% |
| Mutuality | 54% | 69% |
(As with the Hold the Line chart, exact bar-to-label pairing is inferred from context; treat as approximate.)
"Sees what's broken and can't look away" (p.31–34)
We all deserve the same power and the same shot: men, women, everyone. Community-oriented and empathetic, we feel deeply, and see clearly where systems fall short. We can struggle with the agency to act and resilience in the face of adversity. We're seekers and searchers. We do what we can and work on others' behalf.
In their own words: "I will use my power to give voice to the voiceless."
(Image caption on p.31, rendered reversed in the source text layer: "Image source: The Bear.")
Media diet — "Insider operators" (p.32)
The story pattern for In It Together's streaming media is an insecure character constrained by systems, gaining leverage through circumstance or discovery. By showing up vulnerably, they shift power dynamics in their favor and earn one for community — they're not fighting the system, but strategically working it by staying true to themselves.
Strength: "Empathetic, fair, supportive" — defining belief: "I have the ability to articulate the feelings of the people around me." (p.33)
Demographic highlights
| Age | Race | Place | Marital status | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18–29 | 13% | White | 72% | Suburban | 56% | Married | 46% |
| 30–44 | 31% | Black | 9% | Urban | 31% | Single | 38% |
| 45–64 | 31% | Latino | 8% | Rural | 13% | Divorced | 13% |
| 65+ | 25% | Other | 11% | Other | 3% |
Education: 44% no college, 11% 2-yr degree, 45% 4-yr degree ★. Parents: 43% parents, 18% parents with kids under 18. Religion: 12% attend church, 11% Christian. Party: 49% Democrat ★, 35% Independent ★, 8% Republican.
Key attitudes: Reject that men have it harder — the single strongest predictor of being in this audience; believe men and women have similar strengths; best friends tend to be women; 4% name other groups when asked who benefits from their work, vs. 1.5% of other men; 7% trust advocacy organizations vs. 4% of other men; 5% push back on power vs. 2% of other men.
On traits they admire in people: "Honesty, selflessness, generosity, empathy and tolerance of others."
On a person they admire and why: "Barack Obama because he fought, was smart, and while flawed seemed to genuinely care about the people."
Flourishing gap — agency and resilience (p.34)
In It Together are among the most connected and supportive audiences. Their mutuality score leads every audience, including women, by 2+ points. They see clearly, care deeply, and show up. What they struggle with is converting that care into action and recovering from setbacks: their agency score sits −10 points below all audiences — the widest agency gap of any audience — and their resilience score is −1 point below all audiences. Being so attuned to what's wrong, and so aware of the scale of it, can be paralyzing, and they can doubt their own efficacy.
Table — Flourishing agreement, In It Together vs. all audiences
| Dimension | In It Together | All audiences |
|---|---|---|
| Agency | 47% | 57% |
| Resilience | 54% | 55% |
| Bridging | 68% | 69% |
| Connection | 71% | 68% |
| Mutuality | 79% | 70% |
(As above, exact bar-to-label pairing is inferred from context; treat as approximate.)
"Adaptive problem-solver, lifelong learner" (p.35–38)
We figure it out. We fix it. We leave it better than we found it, especially at work and for our families. We go to church. We're loyal to leaders. We protect what's ours, in a world that's changing fast, sometimes for the worse. Our flourishing gaps are resilience, bridging, agency.
In their own words: "Give me a problem and I'll figure it out. My family's better off because I do."
(Image caption on p.35, rendered reversed in the source text layer: "Image source: Heartland.")
Media diet — "Competent loner redeemed" (p.36)
The story pattern in Mr Fixit's streaming media looks like a skilled, capable loner carrying old wounds, drawn back into action by necessity. Through a mission with an unlikely partner, they find purpose in protecting others, peace through choosing principle over revenge, and connection through demonstrated skill, competence, and wisdom.
Strength: "Figures it out and fixes it" — defining belief: "When facing a major challenge, I turn to family for support." (p.37)
Demographic highlights
| Age | Race | Place | Marital status | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18–29 | 12% | White | 77% | Suburban | 54% | Married | 57% |
| 30–44 | 13% | Black | 9% | Urban | 22% | Single | 25% |
| 45–64 | 42% | Latino | 7% | Rural ★ | 24% | Divorced | 13% |
| 65+ ★ | 33% | Other | 7% | Other | 5% |
Education: 57% no college, 12% 2-yr degree, 31% 4-yr degree. Parents: 67% parents, 18% parents with kids under 18. Religion: 41% attend church ★, 45% Christian ★. Party: 54% Republican ★, 23% Independent, 18% Democrat.
Key attitudes: Information comes from conservative media and local news, "the most unbiased reporting in news"; admire leaders who "get things done," like Reagan and Trump; 4% name their employer as a beneficiary of their work vs. 1% of other audiences — the strongest employer-loyalty signal; 10% cite faith as a turning point in their lives vs. 5% of other audiences.
On traits they admire in people: "Kind, gentle, honest, reliable, forceful, strong."
On a person they admire and why: "President Ronald Reagan. He got our country moving in the right direction and created new job growth."
Flourishing gap — agency, bridging, resilience (p.38)
Mr Fixit lags most on resilience and slightly less on agency and bridging — working across difference. Otherwise, this audience enjoys flourishing scores close to or slightly above the average across all audiences. Their faith, their orientation as problem solvers and lifelong learners, and their dedication to work and family likely act as a buffer, affording them a steadiness and resolve in how they relate to others.
Table — Flourishing agreement, Mr Fixit vs. all audiences
| Dimension | Mr Fixit | All audiences |
|---|---|---|
| Agency | 66% | 69% |
| Resilience | 54% | 68% |
| Bridging | 56% | 70% |
| Connection | 66% | 71% |
| Mutuality | 57% | 54% |
(As above, exact bar-to-label pairing is inferred from context; treat as approximate.)
"Faith-anchored, community-rooted" (p.39–42)
Service and faith are the way. We feed the homeless. We care for our elders, mentor the young. We set the stage for what comes next, and we're already flourishing, across all dimensions. We meet the world around us with flexibility, tolerance, and forbearance, channeling pain into purpose. We've seen it all. We have enough.
In their own words: "God showed me it's not about me. My community is better off because I'm here, and that's enough."
(Image caption on p.39, rendered reversed in the source text layer: "Image source: Duck Dynasty.")
Media diet — "Righteous warrior" (p.40)
The story pattern in Sacred Duty's streaming media is a highly capable individual in crisis finding purpose through protecting the vulnerable or fighting corruption. A mission-based partnership allows them to channel their pain into purposeful action, often against the powerful. In this way, they achieve justice and find deeper meaning in service.
Strength: "Faithful service" — defining belief: "The path to a fulfilling life is serving something larger than yourself." (p.41)
Demographic highlights
| Age | Race | Place | Marital status | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18–29 | 5% | White | 68% | Suburban | 44% | Married | 54% |
| 30–44 | 20% | Black | 12% | Urban | 33% | Single | 26% |
| 45–64 ★ | 46% | Latino | 9% | Rural | 23% | Divorced | 13% |
| 65+ | 29% | Other | 11% | Other | 7% |
Education: 55% no college, 10% 2-yr degree, 35% 4-yr degree. Parents: 68% parents ★, 16% parents with kids under 18. Religion: 25% attend church, 29% Christian. Party: 41% Democrat, 32% Republican, 22% Independent.
Key attitudes: Strongest service signal of any audience; 4% name their local community when asked who benefits from their work vs. 3% of other men; 35% name a systems-change character who fights for reform as admirable vs. 16% of other men; 10% admire Jesus vs. 4% of other men; 16% value compassion vs. 8% of other men; 6% value loving warmth vs. 3% of other men.
On traits they admire in people: "Compassionate, honest, loving, merciful, unselfish, determined."
On a person they admire and why: "Jesus. Loving others as my self, helping the weakest among us, avoiding the desire for power over others, striving for peace."
Flourishing gap — none! They're already flourishing (p.42)
Sacred Duty is already flourishing — they score above all audiences' averages on all five flourishing dimensions. They are particularly strong on mutuality, 8+ points above all audiences and +1 above women. Also strong is resilience, at 6+ points above all audiences, and connection. Their faith and service orientation likely give them a container large enough to hold difficulty without being overwhelmed. Both Mr Fixit and Sacred Duty are deeply engaged with the people in their lives, but Sacred Duty enjoys a distinctive steadiness in their lives and communities.
Table — Flourishing agreement, Sacred Duty vs. all audiences
| Dimension | Sacred Duty | All audiences |
|---|---|---|
| Agency | 73% | 65% |
| Resilience | 75% | 68% |
| Bridging | 70% | 69% |
| Connection | 78% | 60% |
| Mutuality | 57% | 54% |
(As above, exact bar-to-label pairing is inferred from context; treat as approximate — the qualitative summary in the prose is the more reliable takeaway.)
(p.43 — comparison table across all five audiences)
| Hold the Line | Locked In | In It Together | Mr Fixit | Sacred Duty | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Size | 29% | 23% | 21% | 16% | 11% |
| Tagline | Provider, protector, faith & family rooted | Self-made, self-reliant, plays hard | Sees what's broken and can't look away | Adaptive problem solver & learner | Faith-anchored, community-rooted |
| In their words | We hold things together. We deliver. Loyalty and discipline are key, in a world marked by threat and scarcity. We believe men and women have different strengths and work to do. | We're looking to build something real, for a reason to look up from the grind. In a world where men have to work hard, and no one hands you anything. We don't shy away from conflict. | We all deserve the same power and the same shot: men, women, everyone. Community-oriented and empathetic, we feel deeply. And see clearly where systems fall short. | We figure it out. We fix it. We leave it better than we found it, especially at work and for our families. We're loyal to leaders. We protect what's ours, in a world that's changing fast. | Service and faith are the way. We feed the homeless. We care for our elders, mentor the young. We set the stage for what comes next, channeling pain into purpose. |
| Story pattern (streaming) | Isolated professional receives a call to protect a vulnerable person, and the mission creates a bond. | Wounded outsider with hidden abilities forced to reveal their true self. Others' acceptance is followed by self-acceptance. | Character constrained by expectations uses strategic positioning and authentic presence to earn their place. | Professional loner forms a partnership through shared danger and gains trust through competence. | Capable individual channels pain into purpose through protecting others and/or fighting against corruption. |
| Flourishing gaps | Mutuality, connection, bridging | Mutuality, connection, agency | Agency, resilience | Resilience, bridging, mutuality | No gaps! |
| Flourishing strengths | Agency leads all audiences | Bridging | Mutuality leads all audiences | — | Connection, mutuality, resilience |
| Demography | 48% age 18–44; 51% married; 58% parents; 53% no college; 46% suburban; 32% church-going | 58% age 18–44; 45% single; 44% parents; 51% no college; 38% urban; 22% church-going | 56% age 45+; 46% married; 43% parents; 45% 4-yr degree; 56% suburban; 12% church-going | 75% age 45+; 57% married; 67% parents; 57% no college; 24% rural; 41% church-going | 75% age 45+; 57% married; 68% parents; 55% no college; 44% suburban; 25% church-going |
(p.44)
How audiences of men engage with YouTube channels that reliably offer up misogyny and gender grievance; how it affects them; and what this suggests for supporting men in their journey toward a more loving, equal future.
Engagement networks for our audiences on YouTube (p.45)
The study wondered whether it could derive from audiences' behaviors a coherent monoculture or rabbit hole of gender grievance and misogyny content men risk falling into online. It started with two channels whose content reliably demeans women guests (FreshandFit) and makes women look foolish on camera (Whatever), plus their clip feeds (FreshandFit Clips + Whatever Clips). It then looked for channels that (1) co-occur with these two channels in the viewing behaviors of 40+ media panelists, and (2) also reliably feature misogyny and gender grievance — yielding an additional 4 channels: Better Bachelor, The Crucible, Kevin Samuels, and Pearl.
From these 8 anchor channels, networks were spun out according to the audiences' engagement behaviors. YouTube allows seeing what other channel engagements co-occur on the same day with anchor-channel engagements; networks were limited to the 100 nearest neighboring channels. In the network visualization, each anchor channel is a rectangle, and channels that co-occur in audiences' same-day engagement behaviors are circles, sized by the number of networks they appear in and colored by the audience most engaged with them (grey = no clearly distinctive audience).
Anchor channels — what we learn (p.46)
The 8 anchor channels mainly cluster with a more mainstream mix of sports, music, gaming, film, late-night, and podcast content, suggesting something other than a monoculture or a rabbit hole. The anchor channels primarily engage the Hold the Line and Locked In audiences — these two audiences appear to be most susceptible to this kind of content. All audiences engage channels networked with the anchor channels, which suggests potential pathways to this content via recommendations, but overall anchor-channel reach is exceedingly low.
Channel reach (p.47)
The percentage of men in the panel who engage with any of the 8 anchor channels on any given day (average daily reach) is very low — when rounded to two decimal places, many numbers disappear to zero. The channel networks the anchor channels are embedded within have reach 50x to 1,000x higher; the top eight network channels by average daily reach are included below for comparison.
Table — Average daily reach, anchor channels vs. top network channels
| Channel | Men overall | Women overall | Hold the Line | Locked In | In It Together | Mr Fixit | Sacred Duty |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anchor channels | |||||||
| Whatever Clips | 0.03% | 0.01% | 0.04% | 0.02% | 0.02% | 0.02% | 0.02% |
| Whatever | 0.01% | 0.01% | 0.01% | 0.01% | 0.02% | 0.01% | 0% |
| FreshandFit | 0.01% | 0% | 0.01% | 0.02% | 0.01% | 0% | 0% |
| Pearl | 0.01% | 0% | 0.01% | 0.01% | 0.01% | 0% | 0.01% |
| Better Bachelor | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0.01% | 0.01% | 0% |
| FreshandFit Clips | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0.01% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| The Crucible | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0.01% |
| Kevin Samuels | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| Top network channels | |||||||
| penguinz0 | 1.16% | 0.49% | 1.07% | 1.31% | 1.21% | 0.87% | 0.93% |
| MrBeast | 0.38% | 0.20% | 0.35% | 0.46% | 0.35% | 0.29% | 0.32% |
| Fox News | 0.21% | 0.17% | 0.27% | 0.12% | 0.22% | 0.34% | 0.31% |
| SNL | 0.15% | 0.13% | 0.13% | 0.14% | 0.19% | 0.13% | 0.13% |
| CNN | 0.12% | 0.10% | 0.09% | 0.10% | 0.16% | 0.13% | 0.17% |
| PowerfulJRE | 0.11% | 0.04% | 0.12% | 0.09% | 0.12% | 0.11% | 0.08% |
| ESPN | 0.09% | 0.03% | 0.08% | 0.08% | 0.11% | 0.08% | 0.08% |
| Philip DeFranco | 0.05% | 0.04% | 0.04% | 0.05% | 0.06% | 0.06% | 0.05% |
Locked In audience close-up (p.48)
The top channels by average daily reach associated with the anchor channels distinctively engaged by the Locked In audience skew toward self-improvement: how-to and self-presentation (Teachingmensfashion, Front Row with Ed and Elizabeth, Men's Health); science-and-build (Tom Stanton, Matt Wolfe, The Military Show); gaming skill-builders (Haelian, Xuses); and hustle education (Thomas Frank, The Finance Zone). There's also a commentary-talk strand (Philip DeFranco, penguinz0, PowerfulJRE) — ranging across comedy, MMA, and politics, but carrying a "get in shape, optimize yourself" vibe. Here, gender-grievance content reads as advice.
Hold the Line audience close-up (p.49)
The top channels associated with the anchor channels distinctively engaged by the Hold the Line audience skew toward entertainment rather than life lessons: Film & Animation (anime-manhwa clips, movie recaps and reaction, fandom content — Asura Recaps, AniLefort, CineBinge, Rob Squad Movie Reactions, Star Wars Centralized, Cobra Kai) and Comedy (street-charisma reaction performances — Josh Nasar, Benedict Polizzi). There's also winning as spectacle: combat sports (MMA Talk, Karate Combat), athlete drama (Behind the Line), and political argument as contest (Sargon of Akkad, Jillian Michaels in debate-not-workout mode). Here, gender-grievance content also occurs as spectacle.
What this means (p.50)
Engagement with the gender-grievance and misogyny content examined is rare for all audiences via source channels — a video might rack up millions of views, but almost no one is watching this content regularly; it shows up occasionally, alongside gaming, fitness, comedy, and whatever else men engage with daily. Tactics to redirect men's attention elsewhere are probably superfluous, since most of the time men's attention is already elsewhere.
It's probably better to think about a "manosphere" not as a rabbit hole or coherent monoculture of content, but as a diffuse cultural phenomenon that propagates via memes, clips, visual styles, and insider language rather than via at-the-source views, subscriptions, or recommendations. Andrew Tate proves that low channel reach and high cultural penetration are simultaneously possible: even when Tate's source channels were banned from most platforms, he was one of the most searched-for people in the world. The analysis observed direct consumption at the source on a particular platform, but did not quantify cultural diffusion — a stated area for future work.
Metaphors matter, insofar as they shape perceptions of problems and suggest solutions. The rabbit-hole metaphor implies a captive, escalating audience, which evidence on YouTube does not support; the report recommends retiring it, and letting empirical investigation continue to sharpen the view of what's happening and what response it demands.
How content affects audiences (p.51)
To discover how the content audiences engage affects them, 32 videos were sampled and clipped from the anchor channels, their broader engagement networks, and beyond — covering the full range of YouTube content that engages men: fitness, firearms, philosophy, commentary, craft, explainers, play-alongs, and more. Creators/clips sampled include Sam Cornforth, Paul Olima, Euan Findlay, John Fisher, Fergus Crawley, Daragh Fleming, Fresh & Fit, Darius M, Colin Coaches, Flagrant, Zack Telander, Andrew Huberman, Vox, Marni Your Personal Wing Girl, Alexander Grace, Whatever, Yes Theory, Thinking Football, Sajam, Joe Rogan, Scott Galloway, Vlogbrothers, JimmyOnRelationships, Aba N Preach, Ham Radio Crash Course, Deestroying, ClassicFirearms, PBS, Chris Williamson, LegalEagle, Allen Pan, and SmarterEveryDay.
How it was tested (p.52)
The 32 videos were tested in randomized control trial-style online tests, with 10,000 men (10,977 per the appendix methods detail): panelists were randomly assigned to treatment and control groups, the treatment group saw one of the videos, and the control group saw a "placebo" video (like a screensaver). Both groups then completed the same survey on narrowing and broadening emotions, the five flourishing beliefs, and standard demographics and values questions. The study looked for videos that increased broadening emotion (amused, hopeful, inspired, proud), decreased narrowing emotion (afraid, angry, frustrated, overwhelmed), and increased agreement with the flourishing beliefs (agency, resilience, bridging, connection, mutuality).
Grievance content saps flourishing + affect (p.53)
Among the 32 videos tested, content close in to the 8 anchor channels was 8x more likely to decrease broadening emotions and 3x more likely to both increase narrowing emotions and decrease agreement with the flourishing beliefs. However, some of this content increased the agency dimension of flourishing — suggesting that audiences engaging with such content may really be shopping for agency, which the Locked In audience definitely lags on. This may open an opportunity for content that triggers agency centered on taking action from within situations, rather than exercising control over situations, and over people, in particular, women.
Inside vs. outside (p.54)
Being lectured at, or being a voyeur of a world that feels sealed off, staid or static, increases narrowing emotions, decreases broadening emotions, and decreases most dimensions of flourishing. By contrast, content that creates the feeling of the viewer being inside the action — whether through a dynamic situation, locations, camera work, or savvy editing — keeps narrowing emotions and flourishing beliefs stable and lifts broadening emotions.
| Being inside an experience | Being lectured at |
|---|---|
| Zack Telander — strength coach cues a strongman athlete through a PR lift attempt, rep by rep. Viewer feels ringside in his unfolding triumph. | Andrew Huberman — host holds forth about porn as a super-stimulus for men. Serious intellectual conversation, fly-on-the-wall viewer. |
| Joe Rogan — Rogan, Matt Damon, and Ben Affleck on giving film crew profit-share bonuses. Editing gives participatory feel. | Fresh & Fit — host tells a 24-year-old woman she is narcissistic and will be used rather than loved. Humiliation from the outside in. |
| Allen Pan — engineer tests arm exoskeleton in arm wrestling at Muscle Beach. Viewer rides along through iterative attempts and growth. | Alexander Grace — moral commentary on interview with woman recounting her own infidelity, judgment from a distance, fly-on-the-wall viewer. |
(Sliders in the source show movement, relative to baseline, on broadening emotion, narrowing emotion, agency, resilience, bridging, connection, and mutuality, for "Being Inside an Experience" videos (orange) vs. "Being Lectured At" videos (blue), with stars marking statistically significant movement. Exact slider positions are a visual/analog scale in the source and aren't recoverable as precise numbers from text extraction — the qualitative direction described in the surrounding prose is the reliable takeaway.)
Dudes doing vs. solo reactions (p.55)
Building, competing, exploring, coaching — doing any social activity in groups that manifestly engages curiosity and skill — is broadening. It lifts the bridging, mutuality, and resilience dimensions of flourishing too. By contrast, the emotional signature of watching one dude rant and react on screen appears to be narrowing. Even worse is judgy content that assigns blame, which collapses the belief in supporting others, or mutuality.
| Two+ dudes doing | Solo rants + reactions |
|---|---|
| Deestroying — flag football game with iShowSpeed; live ins and outs of athlete life: wins, losses, respect for opponents, trash talk and tactics. | Flagrant — breathless, high-strung, studio-set news-anchor-style rant on Trump's inauguration day and all the billionaires in attendance. |
| SmarterEveryDay — shared curiosity outdoors; Destin and Phil close up on how cicadas make noise, using a high-speed camera, with post-mortem on the project. | Aba N Preach — earnest, measured, straight-to-camera critique of a creator who allegedly recorded and shared videos of women without consent. |
| Sajam — 3 dudes reacting in split screen to gaming clips, asking "will it kill?" Lots of laughs + gentle trash-talking. | Darius M — low-res webcam reaction to a clipped interview with a woman about her dating choices; commentary on the dating scene, split screen. |
Critique vs. men just being men (p.56)
Referencing being a man or critiquing gender norms — even inside of comedy — zeros out broadening emotions and raises narrowing emotions. It also suppresses the bridging, connection, and mutuality dimensions of flourishing. By contrast, content that just shows men being men, doing stuff together in groups, and brings viewers into the action, just works. No topic seems to be inherently bad: fitness, firearms, gaming, finance.
| Not about men per se | Bro culture + manbox critique |
|---|---|
| Deestroying — flag football with iShowSpeed; live ins and outs of athlete life. | John Fisher — boxer cries in dressing room: "My dad's strong." "It's alright to cry if you're a man. Try to do it in private. Not like me." |
| Joe Rogan — Rogan, Matt Damon, and Ben Affleck on giving film crew profit-share bonuses. | Colin Coaches — lifter argues gym should be about enjoyment, not optimization nor the grindset. "I just like lifting weights and being jacked." |
| SmarterEveryDay — shared curiosity outdoors, cicadas and high-speed camera. | Sam Cornforth — polished comedy sketch satirizing 2025 fitness-bro performative-ness, optimization, and creator culture. "Say less x." |
(p.57)
To support men's flourishing through media as they move toward a more loving, equal future, the content testing suggests:
(p.58)
Questions? Email [email protected].
Harmony Labs is a nonprofit media research lab on a mission to research and reshape society's relationship with media, using science, data, and creativity. For more than a decade, its work has helped storytellers and strategists, decision makers and dreamers, harness the immense power of media to shape a positive, pluralistic future and support human flourishing.
LinkUp Lab, an innovation hub designed by Equimundo and Futures Without Violence, incubates and accelerates solutions that reimagine the online spaces where young men play and connect, to be safer, supportive, and pro-social.
Special thanks to project advisors and reviewers, including Soren Duggan, Alex Nemo Hanse, Richie Hardcore, Ashley Kolaya, Sam Pressler, Jake Stika, Ezra Sullivan, and Kaitlyn Tierney.
Harmony Labs, 1460 Broadway, New York, NY 10036 · +1 212 966 7606 · [email protected] · harmonylabs.org
(p.59–65)
Survey. A survey of some 70 items was fielded in October 2025 to 3,000 general-population respondents, serving as the main audience-segmentation instrument for the project. Values and attitudinal dimensions in the survey data were used to cluster respondents into five distinct audience segments.
Streaming analysis. 7 months of Narrative Observatory streaming media data — the streaming films and series engaged by panelists from June through December 2024 — were used to determine which content was most distinctively engaged by each audience and by gender (identifying content watched disproportionately more than other audiences, rather than simply the most popular titles), then assessed for relevance to flourishing. AI and human annotation coded each story across four stages — starting state, catalyst, transformation, and resolution — evaluating how each story spoke to themes of growth and flourishing, and emotion, then looking for themes across streaming media for different audiences and genders.
YouTube network analysis. Narrative Observatory YouTube viewing panel data was used to collect YouTube videos actually engaged by panelists from January through December 2024. Channel networks were built anchored around select channels, measuring audience overlap between every channel pair (high overlap = "close," low overlap = "far," producing a co-viewing distance); each anchor's network is its 100 nearest neighbors by that measure. Average daily reach was also calculated: the average per-day share of active panelists who watched a given anchor or any channel in its network.
Content testing. 32 videos were tested in randomized control trial-style online tests, with 10,977 men. Panelists were randomly assigned to treatment and control groups; the treatment group saw one of the 32 videos, and the control group saw a "placebo" video (like a screensaver). Both groups completed the same survey on narrowing and broadening emotions, the five flourishing beliefs, and a standard battery of demographics and values questions.
(pp.61–65 — reproduced as a reference table of survey items and response options)
| Section | Survey item(s) | Response options |
|---|---|---|
| Narrative Goal v1 | I am in full control of my life, even when I face setbacks · I know how to work with people who disagree with me to achieve my goals · Making time for meaningful friendships is a top priority for me right now · When I feel stress, I am comfortable asking for support · I go out of my way to support others when they succeed | Strongly disagree; Somewhat disagree; Neither agree nor disagree; Somewhat agree; Strongly agree |
| Admirable Traits | The kinds of people I really admire and want to be like are... (select 3) · What are the traits you most admire and want to be like? · To what extent do you describe yourself as [piped trait]? · Name a real person (living or dead) you really admire and why | Loyal; Friendly; Protective; Nurturing; Physically fit; Respected; Aggressive; Wealthy; Strong; Confident; Generous; Something else [open-ended] — self-match question: That doesn't describe me at all; That somewhat describes me; That perfectly describes me — name-a-person: open-ended |
| Emotional Intelligence | I have the ability to articulate the feelings of the people around me · I am good at identifying my feelings · I struggle to articulate the feelings of the people around me · It is hard for me to identify my feelings | Never true; Rarely true; Sometimes true; Often true; Almost always true |
| Action Triggers | The kind of person I admire would have to take action if they realized... (select top 2) | People they care about were being hurt or threatened; Others needed help and they were the one who could provide it; They had to change in order to be true to themselves; They couldn't handle things on their own anymore |
| Friendship & Support | When facing a major challenge, how often do you turn to the following people for support? (family related by blood; close friends who really know me; allies like teachers, coaches, colleagues; books/podcasts/influencer content/other media; medical professionals like a therapist) · Some of my best friends are men · Some of my best friends are women | Never; Rarely; Sometimes; Always (support items) — Strongly disagree...Strongly agree (friends items) |
| Purpose, Service & Meaning | I do not have enough meaning in my life · When you think about the work you do or want to do in life, who do you most hope benefits from it? · Raising kids is an important part of living a good life · Having and caring for a spouse is an important part of living a good life · The path to a fulfilling life is serving something larger than yourself · At this time of my life, I see myself as helping others in meaningful ways · At this time of my life, I see myself as willing to take risks for what matters most | Absolutely untrue...Absolutely true (5–7 pt scale) / open-ended / Strongly disagree...Strongly agree / Not at all; A little; Somewhat; Very much |
| Transformation | Describe a moment that transformed your life | Open-ended |
| Relationships & Gender | In romantic relationships, I prefer to... · My approach to long-term romantic commitment is... · I am confident I can find romantic partners · In the stories that really resonate with me, the main obstacles/threats are usually represented by... · The people who are truly evil are usually... · Who is best suited to make sure material needs are met? To care for others (cooking, cleaning, basic needs)? To create joy for others? · Men and women shouldn't try to be friends because sex gets in the way · Men and women have fundamentally different vs. mostly similar strengths · I have felt pressure to have children I wasn't sure I wanted · Men have it harder than women when it comes to opportunities · Have you experienced being forced to do something sexual that you didn't want to do? | Varies by item: forced-choice options (e.g., "share my deepest thoughts and feelings openly / keep some emotional boundaries / focus on actions"; "Men / Women / Gender doesn't matter"; "Every family decides / Men provide / Women provide"); Strongly disagree...Strongly agree; Yes/No/Prefer not to answer |
| Agency, Resilience & Conflict | I keep pushing for what I need even when people get uncomfortable · If something really important was at stake, I wouldn't hesitate to get physical in a fight · I discuss my differences with others calmly and openly | Strongly disagree...Strongly agree |
| Governance & Trust | Whom do you trust most to provide information about how local/federal government are working? To stand up for your rights and needs? To make sure the government delivers? | Open-ended |
| Good Life | Everyone has a different belief about what it takes to live a good life; what's your opinion? | Open-ended |
| Systems Change | Who is a hero from a book, TV show, or movie who you think made their society more democratic? | Open-ended |
| Demographics / Values | [Standard battery] | [Standard battery] |
| Narrative Goal v2 | I know exactly what actions will move my life forward, and I take them consistently · When things go wrong, I have multiple ways to handle it and get back on track · I know how to work with people who disagree with me to achieve my goals · Making time for meaningful friendships is a top priority for me right now · I go out of my way to support others when they succeed | Strongly disagree...Strongly agree |
| Broadening | Right now, I feel: hopeful / inspired / proud / amused | Agreement scale |
| Narrowing | Right now, I feel: afraid / angry / frustrated / overwhelmed | Agreement scale |
| Gender | What gender do you identify with? | Male; Female; Non-binary; Transgender male; Transgender female; Agender; My gender is not listed |
(Note: Narrative Goal v1 and v2 are the same five belief statements — v1 uses a slightly different first item ("I am in full control of my life, even when I face setbacks") than v2 ("I know exactly what actions will move my life forward, and I take them consistently"), suggesting the survey instrument was refined between fielding waves; both appear in the source appendix as printed.)
This Markdown file was generated from a 65-slide Keynote-exported PDF (Equimundo_Mens_Flourishingand_Media_final_260805_a18d70bedc.pdf), the companion "flourishing" report to the porn-engagement report converted earlier. A few things to know about fidelity: