Last week, Politico convened a committee of Democratic “experts” to discuss masculinity. A boring commission of pollsters, strategists, academics, filmmakers, and activists ruminated that the Democrats didn’t appeal to working-class men, but their overly-focused focus on race led them wildly astray. All things considered, no one seems to know what a real man is, even if he goes to buy him a drink.
First, we have to deal with blatant hypocrisy.of Round table for 7 people It consisted of 2 female panelists and 1 female moderator. Imagine the liberal reaction if a committee of almost half men met to discuss women’s issues. Feminist outrage is deafening and a sure sign that patriarchal societies are running out of control. Nonetheless, the real problem lies in their view of the racial stratification of masculinity. (Related article: Corporate media’s ostensible concern over the masculinity crisis masks darker motives.)
The panel ostensibly met to “solve” the Democratic Party’s “male problem.” In practice, however, it has become both a cyclical hate session against conservative white men and a race to see who can come up with the most patronizing and watered-down ways to appeal to non-white men.
This one thing is less than half of what it means to be human.@scrowder#warrior poetry #manliness pic.twitter.com/BpGru7SqJa
— Warrior Poet Society (@johnlovell275) July 17, 2023
But at least they finally admitted there was a problem.a perfect hug Feminist ideals of marriage, family, and society “mark the Democratic Party as feminine” for many American men. They acknowledge that about 70 percent of working-class white men will inevitably vote Republican, but they are concerned about the growing share of black and Latinx voters. last election. But Democrats have little power to do anything to change the trajectory and are trapped in their own base.
In 2012, President Barack Obama put together a grand new theory on electoral politics. his “Ascendant Unionwill form alliances between racial and sexual minorities and liberal, college-educated white women who aspire to be “allies” of the “marginalized”. The theory is that they were white, heterosexual, united and united under the patriarchy. Together they will form an invincible coalition that will cement Democratic dominance for generations.It worked for a glamorous figure like Obama, but increasingly it’s proving to be effective. hard to reproduce.
Desperate to spread the victimhood narrative, Democrats overlooked the fact that these groups have very different worldviews. latino american Voters are very conservative when it comes to lifestyle, morals and values, black voters, especially religious But liberal white women are, well, liberals. The actual level of repression in American society is not enough to form a lasting alliance between the two nations, especially now that the Democratic Party is gaining ground. increasingly extreme about social issues.
If Democrats embrace the socially conservative masculinity that has long been derided as harmful, their awakened constituencies will be marginalized. Something has to be given, but acknowledging reality is no longer part of Democrat strategy.
To convince themselves that the theory of victory based on the ideologies on which this coalition is stable and on which their fortunes and careers have been built, the Democrats must resort to racial essentialism closer to white supremacist thinking than anything American society has witnessed in recent generations. Join the Politico panel. For Democrats like this, white men and non-white men are not the same.
They seem to have no idea what traditional masculinity is, but fill it back up with the pejorative stereotype of the “macho man.” This type of traditional masculinity appears to be a series of “gun-toting and fist-pumping tropes” that appeal to the “white male aggression” that the Republican Party uses to mobilize voters.
Such masculinity is clearly a white phenomenon. Their “precarious masculinity” is “threatened” by “the rise of women and people of color.” This anxiety leads them to the “weapon of the far right.” This type of masculinity boils down to feeling the need to put on a three-cornered hat and storm the Houses of Parliament.
The alternative to this caricature seems to believe it will naturally appeal to black and Latino voters, but that is the stereotype of the “good guy.” A white man’s “fist-to-fist conversation” is “an entirely different kind of conversation than what I know of in communities of color,” said one panelist.
For blacks and Latinos, the real question comes from the societal “economic pressures” that are supposed to hold them back: “Can we offer something?”
So the solution to courting black and Latino men is to help them regain their role as providers: “fight for more health care, fight for more paid leave, fight for better wages.” This is as nonsense as it is condescending. Democrats want the state to increasingly play the role of husband and father, so that men feel like providers. They ensure that men can provide by ensuring they don’t have to provide at all. (Related: War Against Leftist Masculinity Is Destroying Western Civilization)
The absurdity of this conversation shows that Democrats only care about maintaining the coalition that will protect them in the next election. They are not at all concerned with issues that “threat” masculinity, real or imagined. If so, they will find that masculinity cannot be characterized by race, or reduced to a false dichotomy between macho and goodness.
Traditional masculinity is a happy medium between the two. Men’s innate macho aggression, assertiveness, and dominance are tamed by their wives and children, and their need to offer something higher than themselves. All men tend to protect and provide, but pretending otherwise only ensures that men of all races continue to flee the Democratic Party.
