Radical feminists, LGBT activists, and henpecked men can’t redefine masculinity
Democrats find themselves in quite the pickle this election cycle. A party influenced by the second-wave feminist movement for decades is now grappling with how to reach male voters. This was a recurring theme at the recent Democratic National Convention in Chicago, where CNN and MSNBC noted the party’s efforts to appeal to men who are not “testosterone-laden,” as one journalist described them. The Washington Post even got in on this progressive makeover by presenting Doug Emhoff, the husband of Vice President Kamala Harris, as a “sex symbol” and model of modern masculinity. Emhoff’s decision to put his career on the back burner for the sake of his wife’s ambitions is attractive to some liberal women.Progressives have a problem with men so obvious that even Stevie Wonder can see it.This is all quite amusing. The Democratic Party has a broad coalition of voters who hate any expression of traditional masculinity. This includes both liberal and radical feminists, LGBT activists who want to change the definitions of “male” and “female” entirely, and self-flagellating male allies who feel duty-bound to rid themselves publicly of their toxic masculinity. Any man fooled by this attempted rebranding needs his head examined. People who resent men should never be trusted to redefine masculinity. The left has no interest in talking about men as providers for their families, protectors of their homes, or leaders in their communities. Their feeble attempts at male outreach are all about political power. Progressives ignore male college enrollment, economic prospects, and deaths of despair. They see a tech company laying off a male computer programmer to hire a woman in marketing as progress toward “equity” in an industry where sexism supposedly keeps women out of the C-suite. They don’t care if the man supports a wife and four children because, to progressive policymakers, men — especially white men — are too privileged to have their problems taken seriously.This doesn’t mean the party cares about black men, either. Democrats can barely hide their contempt for black men who do not enthusiastically support the Kamala Harris and Tim Walz ticket.One popular influencer who attended last month’s convention posted a profanity-laden rant about heterosexual black men who aren’t supporting Harris. He dismissed these “alpha males” as men who are bad examples for their sons and daughters. I responded by informing him that no man wants to be lectured on masculinity by a guy who said he would give President Biden some “booty” for funding historically black colleges and universities.Democrats have a structural problem reaching men that a new candidate can’t solve. The party focuses more on abortion and pride politics than on working-class issues like blue-collar wages, public safety, and education.A prime example of this shift in priorities is the uproar from progressive politicians, pundits, and celebrities when Florida passed a law prohibiting teachers from discussing sexual orientation and gender identity with young children. The “don’t say gay” controversy even spilled into sports when ESPN interrupted a women’s basketball game to express opposition to the bill. The “worldwide leader in sports” seemed to think it was more important for kids to learn that “men” can have babies before they can even read.Unfortunately for Democrats, more male candidates aren’t going to help them appeal to men, mainly because any man who wants a future in the party must kiss the rainbow ring. This is why New York City Mayor Eric Adams promoted drag queens in the classroom and Maryland Gov. Wes Moore is far more vocal about “trans visibility” than the importance of the nuclear family.Progressives have a problem with men so obvious that even Stevie Wonder can see it. It will likely worsen if Kamala Harris loses in November and men are blamed for letting sexism and misogyny prevent America from “making history.” Perhaps a public tongue-lashing about “toxic masculinity” from a panel of angry feminists and their compliant allies will finally help Democrats connect with potential male voters. After all, nagging must be every man’s love language.
Democrats find themselves in quite the pickle this election cycle. A party influenced by the second-wave feminist movement for decades is now grappling with how to reach male voters. This was a recurring theme at the recent Democratic National Convention in Chicago, where CNN and MSNBC noted the party’s efforts to appeal to men who are not “testosterone-laden,” as one journalist described them.
The Washington Post even got in on this progressive makeover by presenting Doug Emhoff, the husband of Vice President Kamala Harris, as a “sex symbol” and model of modern masculinity. Emhoff’s decision to put his career on the back burner for the sake of his wife’s ambitions is attractive to some liberal women.
Progressives have a problem with men so obvious that even Stevie Wonder can see it.
This is all quite amusing. The Democratic Party has a broad coalition of voters who hate any expression of traditional masculinity. This includes both liberal and radical feminists, LGBT activists who want to change the definitions of “male” and “female” entirely, and self-flagellating male allies who feel duty-bound to rid themselves publicly of their toxic masculinity.
Any man fooled by this attempted rebranding needs his head examined. People who resent men should never be trusted to redefine masculinity. The left has no interest in talking about men as providers for their families, protectors of their homes, or leaders in their communities. Their feeble attempts at male outreach are all about political power.
Progressives ignore male college enrollment, economic prospects, and deaths of despair. They see a tech company laying off a male computer programmer to hire a woman in marketing as progress toward “equity” in an industry where sexism supposedly keeps women out of the C-suite. They don’t care if the man supports a wife and four children because, to progressive policymakers, men — especially white men — are too privileged to have their problems taken seriously.
This doesn’t mean the party cares about black men, either. Democrats can barely hide their contempt for black men who do not enthusiastically support the Kamala Harris and Tim Walz ticket.
One popular influencer who attended last month’s convention posted a profanity-laden rant about heterosexual black men who aren’t supporting Harris. He dismissed these “alpha males” as men who are bad examples for their sons and daughters. I responded by informing him that no man wants to be lectured on masculinity by a guy who said he would give President Biden some “booty” for funding historically black colleges and universities.
Democrats have a structural problem reaching men that a new candidate can’t solve. The party focuses more on abortion and pride politics than on working-class issues like blue-collar wages, public safety, and education.
A prime example of this shift in priorities is the uproar from progressive politicians, pundits, and celebrities when Florida passed a law prohibiting teachers from discussing sexual orientation and gender identity with young children. The “don’t say gay” controversy even spilled into sports when ESPN interrupted a women’s basketball game to express opposition to the bill. The “worldwide leader in sports” seemed to think it was more important for kids to learn that “men” can have babies before they can even read.
Unfortunately for Democrats, more male candidates aren’t going to help them appeal to men, mainly because any man who wants a future in the party must kiss the rainbow ring. This is why New York City Mayor Eric Adams promoted drag queens in the classroom and Maryland Gov. Wes Moore is far more vocal about “trans visibility” than the importance of the nuclear family.
Progressives have a problem with men so obvious that even Stevie Wonder can see it. It will likely worsen if Kamala Harris loses in November and men are blamed for letting sexism and misogyny prevent America from “making history.” Perhaps a public tongue-lashing about “toxic masculinity” from a panel of angry feminists and their compliant allies will finally help Democrats connect with potential male voters. After all, nagging must be every man’s love language.
Originally Published at Daily Wire, World Net Daily, or The Blaze
What's Your Reaction?
