Accessing Closed Groups: Ethical And Methodological Limitations Of Studying Incel Groups

The issue of undercover research is a practice well known to the social sciences. Sometimes it appears to be the only way to penetrate marginal or closed groups and to know invisible (discriminated, violent, illegal) social worlds. However, it can lead the researcher to several ethical questions. This paper aims to investigate the methodological and ethical limits of the study of the Incel community (online groups of "involuntarily celibate" men united by feelings of hatred towards women) and the qualitative methods of undercover analysis with which they can be studied. Violence against women is a global urgency and deepening its roots is a priority calling for new reflection on the tools and ethical limits of research. The current debate focuses on the question: if entering a closed community without declaring that members are being studied is an illegal practice, does it mean giving up the research on these topics? Are there other elements to be considered in this choice? Are there other qualitative research methods more suitable for these new models of social interaction? Starting from a literature review of the empirical and theoretical research on this subject, we propose an updated critical reflection on the pros and cons of the dilemma relating to this specific object of study, in order to critically compare the various online ethnography approaches that allow us to grasp the transformative nuances of this community and the understanding of a social reality that exists, but which is still difficult to penetrate.