Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Tyler Stuart's avatar

Thanks for writing this, Jeremy. I very much agree the Trump and his lackeys are harnessing a righteous anger that the left has broadly failed to address. I also appreciate the way you model, through your writing, the value of emotional intelligence for men. That you being in touch with your anger — and beneath it, your sadness and fear — is actually a reliable sense-making apparatus. It helps you recognize and even empathize with men who've been claimed by Trump's resentful narratives; to offer understanding rather than, simply, dismissal. Props.

While I whole-heartedly agree that the left needs to offer, as you say, "a better, more convincing story for men," I'm not hearing you attempting to put forward that story. Of course, as I writer myself, I know this is big work, and we can't address everything in each article. But I will say that the examples you offer as starting points for an alternative story — talking about the complexity of sex and gender; promoting emotional intelligence; popping our historical delusions about what constitutes "traditional" roles; reframing patriarchy as a social order that harms men, too — all of these threads don't feel like a story to me. In fact, to me they feel like more of the very thing you're trying to say is the problem: abstract concepts that don't resonate with men's daily lives, don't pluck their heart-strings. These are the very stories that men captured by the online right are unconvinced with. It's not compelling to them.

Now, the question of how to pluck at those heart-strings without propping up a reactionary politics is a tricky one because of the intellectual bind we're in. On the one hand, we're forced into a reactionary essentialism, and on the other, left hand, we seem only capable of adopting a stance that denudes masculinity of any real substance. The only meanings we are able to entertain are entirely subjective and highly individualistic. And god forbid we advocate for the notion of manhood having a cultural function. But I think this is what men are longing for: to know that something about who they are is, and can be, a beautiful offering.

I'd be curious to hear how this lands with you.

Expand full comment
PB's avatar
Feb 27Edited

I think that the left or the Democrats need to have some kind of image or ideal of masculinity to which men can both identify with and aspire to. Obama did this in a very low key kind of way, as I think Joe Biden did as well. Also, my impression is that talk about capitalism or anti-capitalism (or socialism or neoliberalism too) turns a lot of people off, and especially a lot of working class people. It sounds cringey and like the sort of thing a college freshman would say, not like a fully grown adult. I think that talk of fighting elites and the powerful and the wealthy is good, but if you start talking about “isms” you stop sounding like a normie. Just talk about the specifics of what you want to do and how that will make people’s lives better. Also, I suspect, but cannot prove, that messages about how a politician or party will make changes that result in men having more freedom or agency do really well, and have been something missing since Obama’s 2008 campaign. “Hope and change”, “Yes we can”, and “we are the ones that we have been waiting for” were always cringe inducing and hokey, but they were also directionally correct and I think successfully sent the message that men were welcome in the coalition.

Expand full comment
29 more comments...

No posts