THANK YOU for this! I appreciate your firsthand insights. Honestly, I cringe when I hear some of our amazing young women Democrat leaders referencing “mediocre white men” in their otherwise rousing speeches. That shit is not going to get us anywhere except more division. As a mom of a teenage daughter and a teenage son, and as a feminist, I’m sick of my political party glorifying the tearing down of men, especially young men still finding their way. We need to do better.
They are not tearing down men anymore then they are tearing down whites, they are criticizing Trumpanzees and their Conservative Lion, alt-right, white nationalist, and hard right allies.
Perhaps this is because of the 20 year difference in our ages…… I don’t disagree with you. Yet I am SO ANGRY that we have to continue to center these white boys, who already get paid more and have infinitely more freedoms than women, Blacks, and POC. Why is the main option we’re being told is to cater to this entitlement that their needs are MORE important than all of the many different people who constitute an actual majority in this country? Also, perhaps the culture they so admire is toxic and oppressive for the rest of us? The 20 year age difference really shows up if you think about what I have seen politically versus you….. both Bush administrations, Clinton, Obama twice, the failure to elect a woman president TWICE, Biden, and the current choice, also twice. I don’t recall the elation you say you experienced dancing for Kamala bc in my political lifetime, it has always been clear that we must listen to men, uphold men, respect men, make sure men’s needs are met…… and frankly, a lot of us are really sick of it.
The only dancing was done by New Democratic youth at Kamala's party, which was stupid since I knew since the early afternoon that Trump would win (I would have realized it in late morning but I missed the television then). Since I don't know if the writer is hyperbolic about her actual age, I think she is nearly 24: I turned 29 on January 14th 7:00 AM, ET. I remember Bush Junior, Obama, Trump being elected, and Biden; there was a failure to elect a progressivist candidate or a woman from 2000 to 2024 (although admittedly the Bernie Bros and the Green Party are Russian shills. All I remember about politics before 9/11 is that the Twin Towers were associated with world business, that Bush Junior was president, and that Bill Clinton gave a speech in 2000: I learned years ago that the Twin Towers were destroyed because the World Trade Organization serves big business and austerity and that Bill Clinton wasted money on the Yugoslav Wars and fighting al'-Qae'-ida and also introduced austerity, abandoning the working class. The alt-lite culture these white male youth like is the trash introduced by Victorian consumerism instead of traditional Christian notions of charity.
As though men don’t already have all the privilege in the world, especially white men, even the young ones. Please stop suggesting that they’re being persecuted.
She implied that white middle class males in college and university have it hard, when in fact their lives are NOT the same as poor white males. This is just feeding into the middle class whining that the Republicans have done since the Gilded Age, which is the same whining that white moderate (New Democrat) and radical centrist (H. Ross Perot and Jesse Ventura supporters) baby busters, Generations X, XY, Y, YZ, and Z, all have: if you are making over 100,000 dollars a year or are still in tertiary education, you are not marginalized. I realized in mid-2012 (when I was 16: my birthday is January 14th, 7:00 AM, ET), that the media NEVER talks about the working class, not the BBC, not the CBC, not Fox, not Obama, not the Mail and Express papers, not The Economist, and not the Toronto Star. The only marginalized middle class people are debt-ridden people who lost their jobs because of layoffs or have to sell the farm because the plant closed and they can't get new equipment, or seniors who are isolated in the cult of youth; the housing crisis was partially caused by baby buster and Generation X bankers (and their Lost, Silent, Greatest, and pre-baby boomer investors) selling to middle class baby buster and Generation X middle class idiots. They also sold to seniors, but the seniors were stressed by the cult of youth and cannot be considered responsible for their actions.
If the collegiate subculture wanted jobs, they could have gotten government assistance like OSAP and gone on welfare (thus getting financial security), and instead of being in stupid fraternities they could have done sports, activism, or academics. Trump won over ALL minority male youth (excepting presumably Southeast Asian male youth, as obviously he didn't win over ALL male youth and Southeast Asians have more motivation to oppose Trump since racist law and order failed to help them and they do NOT want to be deported back to socialist regimes) so the idea Democrats are excluding white youth is silly. Also, why aren't you talking about how white ETHNIC youth are marginalized? Growing up in England, I knew that Celts and eastern Europeans went through hell every day of their lives (although I was too young to think about it), so why aren't you talking about the racism of WASPs and the descendants of the Norman Border Reivers, the anti-migrant Rockefeller Republicans who are the traditional Republican donors? Why aren't you talking about anti-Semitism on the Internet, and how anti-Catholicism is an American tradition? Why don't you mention the fact Appalachian people are discriminated against by Deep Southerners, and the fact the descendants of the Normans like King John dominate politics, thus marginalizing Anglo-Saxons?
Why don't you call out creationist propaganda against atheists, or the cultural appropriation that New Agers, neopagans, and Wiccans do? Fraternity culture is misogynistic and judging by the fact they are not stereotypical neckbeards (and seem to have SOME kind of taste as opposed to pretending) implies they are just Jesse Ventura supporters, who are the centrist version of the alt-right and are thus Gamergaters. The socially liberal policies some have just means some are New Democrats instead, who believe in realpolitik to get things done, or are Conservative Lions like Bill O'Reilly, who did not want to reopen the same sex marriage debate.
Great, measured, well thought out piece of writing. Keeping all your target audience in mind should be campaigning 101?! Unsure why people think that your mention of ensuring campaign messages also reach young white men means you are enabling privilege?! Anyway, well done and that's from a staunch feminist.
Oh good grief. In Rikhard Tanskane’s statement we have verification of the exclusion of young males from any chance of becoming involved in shaping the future. Plus the condescension inherent in the phrase “lowest white man”. Who might that be pray?
It refers to the Poor Whites of the greater Southern United States (and areas settled by Southerners: i.e. cowboy country, the South Midlands, the North Star Republic, the inland between the Coastal Mountains and Pacific ports) who supported segregation despite often being banned from voting themselves, since the rich segregationists divided the poor by convincing "the lowest white man that he was better than the highest black man." Middle class white male youth are not excluded unless they are drug addicts, alcoholics, in debt, sre disabled, or have PTSD (i.e. soldiers or victims of crimes).
Excellent points, Olivia. A reliable source says phone calls to our elected Representatives and Senators are 4:1 R vs. D and that ratio has been going on for years. Same ratio could apply to the "spaces" you mention. Yes, thanks to Pete (the real one) going on Faux regularly to speak the truth and deliver facts, Dems should feel empowered to jump, not wade, into all the spaces where young men hang out. No doubt they will be asked gotcha or inane questions and their words will be used out of context, twisted, and contorted out of recognition by the angertainment posse; however, that would be an opportunity for Dems to call out—explicitly and vociferously on every possible social media platform—the lieslieslieslieslies for what they are and to keep calling them out while continuing to speak facts and truth with specific details about the real opportunities available for young people if they simply knew about them.
Apparently, you haven't read the backstory of how Rogan set it up that she couldn't even though she agreed to. Rogan always knew he was going to endorse Trump.
That sounds familiar, but I think she and Rogan both had scheduling conflicts. I also think Rogan considers Trump the lesser of two evils: he doesn't LIKE Forrest Trump.
True, but there are different levels of affluent and oppressed: middle class white male youth are not the 0.01% (who are 50 people) but they could rise to it.
Get off the “what is wrong with Democrats” trope! I am from a deep red state, Texas. I have reared two sons, now young men. They are not blighted by feminism nor are they such fragile flowers that they cower in the presence of strong women. In my family we are respectful and proud: of men and women. It is time to relieve all men and women in America of the burden imposed by the white patriarchy. This country is the only major world power that has never had a female head of state. So, yes I care deeply about my young men, but I also respect them. I don’t coddle them. And I expect them to see people as people, respect differences and appreciate strength in both women and men.
To be fair, female heads of state in the West are tokens who are selected to distract from the hell women go through every day of their lives: i.e. Kim Campbell, Theresa May, and I forget the name of the one who replaced Boris Johnson then resigned.
I agree with you that men are NOT being marginalized, given the fact that Gamergater-esque attitudes have been promoted since 1960s exploitation films.
It's important to note that what you're talking about is pandering. And it is also demographics, which is more important.
What's important is that the left has allowed the right wing to DEFINE men. Which is, lacking empathy, proudly ignorant, and holding baseless grievances against everyone. The left has had no weapons against this.
The left has a Ryan Gosling Problem. For years Gosling was respected as a great actor that no one wanted to see in movies, and who chased his muse in small independent films. But the truth was, Gosling was always trying to sell out -- he was just bad at it. And now, as a leading man, he still hasn't gotten anywhere. His greatest success is playing an accessory to Barbie.
The Democrats need to SELL OUT. How do you do that? You create a counterpoint to the right in male-dominated spaces -- sports and video games and wherever else men congregate. And the key isn't to provide an ALTERNATIVE, but to emphasize something important... these manosphere guys are STUPID. They're garbage people, petty and dumb and oblivious to the outside world. You don't need a Theo Von -- you need someone that replaces Theo Von. The left has had a No Bro Policy, when in fact you can develop Good Bros. The ones you describe in this article are good. Those people need to be spotlighted more, before they vote for Trump.
But let's make something perfectly clear. Yes, there should be more outreach towards young men, more messaging that takes them into account as having the potential to be unique, extraordinary. But the men who did vote for Trump, who follow the NELK Boys and Andrew Tate and all these podcast nihilists, who think Joe Rogan is "onto something"... these men and boys are repugnant people. There should be no acceptance of the sin of voting for Donald Trump, who himself has done far more to damage the idea of young men as a demographic than any failed messaging on the left's part.
What should be emphasized is that, as far as a classical male archetype, Donald Trump is Not It. He's a scared little boy who knows nothing. He's a rapist -- being a man used to mean dealing with rapists on your own, in a medieval manner. That's not morally acceptable, but it's a lot more defensible than putting a bunch (literally a bunch!) of rapists and rape apologists in the cabinet. No one wanted to engage with Donald Trump on the issue of masculinity, and instead you had sideshows like the barely-there Joe Biden, or Gavin Newsom wasting his time with a debate with Boy Ron DeSantis on Fox News. Voices like Jamie Raskin and Cory Booker and Hakeem Jeffries are not the level of popularity their counterparts on the right are.
Masculinity has to be lifted up to a level to which we aspire. Right now it's something to which you sink. This shouldn't be hard. The Right are putting pathetic puppet men on display and calling that masculinity. Respond to it in kind. You might have to pander a bit, and I personally hate that. But you can pander and still remind the world that these manosphere guys are the scum we wipe off our shoes. The left is losing ground online to the likes of Charlie Kirk and Jack Posobiec. That's utterly pathetic.
ALL white male youth voted for Trump, independents, or stayed home: we CANNOT not have outreach to them. We NEED outreach to them, and many would have voted for the Democrats if they didn't throw Biden under the bus.
If a massive majority of young white males can't be talked out of this hateful right wing garbage, maybe the country doesn't deserve to survive. I'm gambling on the idea that they can.
White. Privileged boys, who were born in 3rd base have trouble with kids who can hit a triple or a home run…. Maybe because without privilege they would be bench warmers. Privileged boys are soft
I would add the same “forgotten”demographic is older males. I know several who voted for Trump (previously voted democrat) because he showed respect in his message for the male image, which they were raised with in the 1950s, resonated. Felt more emphasis on the Democratic side was women’s and LBGQT+ issues. Men struggle to find their place in Democratic messaging.
The Democrats talked about reproductive rights, the economy, transgender and same sex rights, the environment, the labour movement, healthcare, welfare, and dark money. Seniors are marginalized due to the cult of youth, but the youth are NOT.
Hi Olivia - thanks for writing about this. This has become a big area of focus in my life - not so much for winning political campaigns, but for making our world better.
I never knew who Tate was before mid-late 2023, and I doubt anyone takes seriously influencers who pretend they are smart by saying misogynistic things. People are interested in people who only talk about the actual issues like the economy.
I did see that she became concerned because her white male friends were rightists and radical centrists and she wanted them to vote New Democrat: whilst it is true poverty stricken white males and white ethnic males go through hell every day of their lives (I should have said middle class white ETHNIC males do have it hard, since Italians and eastern Europeans would be seen as criminals and Catholics are hated), the middle class has it easy like Joe Biden said in 2018.
If they want to win elections, they should NOT have thrown Biden under the bus and instead gotten rid of the Bernie Bros: they should have also tried to advocate introducing their policies on the municipal level since the Republicans don't like Big Government and are rugged individualists. Democrats can compromise by giving corporate citizenship to unions, guilds, small businesses, and associations (like gun clubs), introduce strict paperwork laws like in East Asia to make sure gun owners are mentally stable to carry guns, and relieve discomfort over gender affirming care by advocating chemical transition rather than surgery. They can also work with Republicans to end tokenism, the affirmative action policies for the white working class which were designed to keep out minorities and women, stop minorities and the poor by being hired by whiteys who want to exploit them, greenwashing, and pinkwashing, as well as crack down on Chinese, North Korean, Cuban, Venezuelan, and eastern European ex-communist (the Guccifers) interference on behalf of Bernie Bros and implicitly Trump (obviously the Stupublicans will never agree to investigate Trump). In order to appease Republican gerrymandering, the Democrats can agree to organize districts by population and ethnicity.
There is NO reason to appease affluent white male youth.
I fail to see what problems white middle class male youth face, except for those who are in debt-ridden families (i.e. parents losing jobs due to the 2007 crisis or forcing to sell the farm because the plant closed). I care about poverty-stricken white males, but you conflate the middle class with them.
She didn’t say pander to them , she didn’t say abandon Democrats values , she said make sure they hear the Democrats message re jobs, education, health care and how it will affect them compared to the alternative choice . Surely that is worth doing to save democracy?
I have a ton of issues with this piece. Of course Harris included "young men" in her economic proposals – they were all-inclusive. The loss of the young white male vote seemed based on the fact that they are not being singled out as special by Democrats and are experiencing panic over things like "DEI," which is being specifically misdefined and sold as a threat to them. And since all DEI means is "merit-based, not identity-based" the right has successfully told them that their unearned privilege is under attack (which it is). It's an effective message because society has told young white men forever that they are owed special privilege. These so-called "cultural spaces" attract these young white men BECAUSE they tell them they are still special and deserve more than others.
Since Democrats are already telling voters that they want to make things better for EVERYONE, I don't see a lot positive in singling out white men for special attention while Black women do most of the hard work and still have to work harder to get anywhere. In this climate, where supports for everyone else are being abolished by government fiat someone has to stand up for those who aren't white, straight, male, affluent and "Christian."
I care about young men and believe men need all the things all humans do--love, communication, purpose, safety, friendship. BUT I also have to acknowledge that "what about the men???" is a deliberate trolling campaign designed to make weak hearted liberals feel anxious and impotent. I had some idiot tell me on LinkedIn today that posting about Martin Luther King Jr. on MLK day wasn't "inclusive". Young men matter. But they are also MEN not babies and are capable of making intelligent, empathetic choices. Many are choosing not to. I can only watch so many clips of Fresh and Fit before I want to hurl.
We the People...that means all of us regardless of any of the labels society has been so gungho about. WE need to stop labeling individuals. WE are all Americans. Can we disagree about how to get to the things we all really agree upon? Of course, but all of the divisions are in the way. Get rid of those, and things become easier to see and deal with. The hard work is to remember that we are all human beings who want the same things: to be happy, feel loved and included, have a good paying job, a roof over our heads, food on the table, money in savings, quality healthcare, and for others and our government to stay out of our personal lives. No one should care what religion you adhere to or if you aren't religious. No one should care who you love. All most want is to be treated equally. Everyone paying their fair share because it is what is right to support what is in the best interests of all, not just ourselves. The Common Good.
You are very wise, Olivia. Dem strategists who put their finger to the wind need to pay attention.
I don’t think she is very wise at all.
I'm not saying she isn't wise in many resects, but I think she is off base here in saying we need two parties that center white men more.
She has been saying the tired old saw that New Democrats were saying in 2015.
THANK YOU for this! I appreciate your firsthand insights. Honestly, I cringe when I hear some of our amazing young women Democrat leaders referencing “mediocre white men” in their otherwise rousing speeches. That shit is not going to get us anywhere except more division. As a mom of a teenage daughter and a teenage son, and as a feminist, I’m sick of my political party glorifying the tearing down of men, especially young men still finding their way. We need to do better.
They are not tearing down men anymore then they are tearing down whites, they are criticizing Trumpanzees and their Conservative Lion, alt-right, white nationalist, and hard right allies.
Perhaps this is because of the 20 year difference in our ages…… I don’t disagree with you. Yet I am SO ANGRY that we have to continue to center these white boys, who already get paid more and have infinitely more freedoms than women, Blacks, and POC. Why is the main option we’re being told is to cater to this entitlement that their needs are MORE important than all of the many different people who constitute an actual majority in this country? Also, perhaps the culture they so admire is toxic and oppressive for the rest of us? The 20 year age difference really shows up if you think about what I have seen politically versus you….. both Bush administrations, Clinton, Obama twice, the failure to elect a woman president TWICE, Biden, and the current choice, also twice. I don’t recall the elation you say you experienced dancing for Kamala bc in my political lifetime, it has always been clear that we must listen to men, uphold men, respect men, make sure men’s needs are met…… and frankly, a lot of us are really sick of it.
The only dancing was done by New Democratic youth at Kamala's party, which was stupid since I knew since the early afternoon that Trump would win (I would have realized it in late morning but I missed the television then). Since I don't know if the writer is hyperbolic about her actual age, I think she is nearly 24: I turned 29 on January 14th 7:00 AM, ET. I remember Bush Junior, Obama, Trump being elected, and Biden; there was a failure to elect a progressivist candidate or a woman from 2000 to 2024 (although admittedly the Bernie Bros and the Green Party are Russian shills. All I remember about politics before 9/11 is that the Twin Towers were associated with world business, that Bush Junior was president, and that Bill Clinton gave a speech in 2000: I learned years ago that the Twin Towers were destroyed because the World Trade Organization serves big business and austerity and that Bill Clinton wasted money on the Yugoslav Wars and fighting al'-Qae'-ida and also introduced austerity, abandoning the working class. The alt-lite culture these white male youth like is the trash introduced by Victorian consumerism instead of traditional Christian notions of charity.
As though men don’t already have all the privilege in the world, especially white men, even the young ones. Please stop suggesting that they’re being persecuted.
I don't believe she said they were being persecuted anywhere.
She implied that white middle class males in college and university have it hard, when in fact their lives are NOT the same as poor white males. This is just feeding into the middle class whining that the Republicans have done since the Gilded Age, which is the same whining that white moderate (New Democrat) and radical centrist (H. Ross Perot and Jesse Ventura supporters) baby busters, Generations X, XY, Y, YZ, and Z, all have: if you are making over 100,000 dollars a year or are still in tertiary education, you are not marginalized. I realized in mid-2012 (when I was 16: my birthday is January 14th, 7:00 AM, ET), that the media NEVER talks about the working class, not the BBC, not the CBC, not Fox, not Obama, not the Mail and Express papers, not The Economist, and not the Toronto Star. The only marginalized middle class people are debt-ridden people who lost their jobs because of layoffs or have to sell the farm because the plant closed and they can't get new equipment, or seniors who are isolated in the cult of youth; the housing crisis was partially caused by baby buster and Generation X bankers (and their Lost, Silent, Greatest, and pre-baby boomer investors) selling to middle class baby buster and Generation X middle class idiots. They also sold to seniors, but the seniors were stressed by the cult of youth and cannot be considered responsible for their actions.
If the collegiate subculture wanted jobs, they could have gotten government assistance like OSAP and gone on welfare (thus getting financial security), and instead of being in stupid fraternities they could have done sports, activism, or academics. Trump won over ALL minority male youth (excepting presumably Southeast Asian male youth, as obviously he didn't win over ALL male youth and Southeast Asians have more motivation to oppose Trump since racist law and order failed to help them and they do NOT want to be deported back to socialist regimes) so the idea Democrats are excluding white youth is silly. Also, why aren't you talking about how white ETHNIC youth are marginalized? Growing up in England, I knew that Celts and eastern Europeans went through hell every day of their lives (although I was too young to think about it), so why aren't you talking about the racism of WASPs and the descendants of the Norman Border Reivers, the anti-migrant Rockefeller Republicans who are the traditional Republican donors? Why aren't you talking about anti-Semitism on the Internet, and how anti-Catholicism is an American tradition? Why don't you mention the fact Appalachian people are discriminated against by Deep Southerners, and the fact the descendants of the Normans like King John dominate politics, thus marginalizing Anglo-Saxons?
Why don't you call out creationist propaganda against atheists, or the cultural appropriation that New Agers, neopagans, and Wiccans do? Fraternity culture is misogynistic and judging by the fact they are not stereotypical neckbeards (and seem to have SOME kind of taste as opposed to pretending) implies they are just Jesse Ventura supporters, who are the centrist version of the alt-right and are thus Gamergaters. The socially liberal policies some have just means some are New Democrats instead, who believe in realpolitik to get things done, or are Conservative Lions like Bill O'Reilly, who did not want to reopen the same sex marriage debate.
Case in point.
Yes, Loretta Scott King led the ethnic feminist movement which showed the misogyny of the civil rights movement.
Great, measured, well thought out piece of writing. Keeping all your target audience in mind should be campaigning 101?! Unsure why people think that your mention of ensuring campaign messages also reach young white men means you are enabling privilege?! Anyway, well done and that's from a staunch feminist.
She is enabling privilege because she is not appealing to "the lowest white man" like MLK wanted to help, but to spoiled middle class vermin.
Oh good grief. In Rikhard Tanskane’s statement we have verification of the exclusion of young males from any chance of becoming involved in shaping the future. Plus the condescension inherent in the phrase “lowest white man”. Who might that be pray?
It refers to the Poor Whites of the greater Southern United States (and areas settled by Southerners: i.e. cowboy country, the South Midlands, the North Star Republic, the inland between the Coastal Mountains and Pacific ports) who supported segregation despite often being banned from voting themselves, since the rich segregationists divided the poor by convincing "the lowest white man that he was better than the highest black man." Middle class white male youth are not excluded unless they are drug addicts, alcoholics, in debt, sre disabled, or have PTSD (i.e. soldiers or victims of crimes).
Excellent points, Olivia. A reliable source says phone calls to our elected Representatives and Senators are 4:1 R vs. D and that ratio has been going on for years. Same ratio could apply to the "spaces" you mention. Yes, thanks to Pete (the real one) going on Faux regularly to speak the truth and deliver facts, Dems should feel empowered to jump, not wade, into all the spaces where young men hang out. No doubt they will be asked gotcha or inane questions and their words will be used out of context, twisted, and contorted out of recognition by the angertainment posse; however, that would be an opportunity for Dems to call out—explicitly and vociferously on every possible social media platform—the lieslieslieslieslies for what they are and to keep calling them out while continuing to speak facts and truth with specific details about the real opportunities available for young people if they simply knew about them.
I do think Kamala should have gone on Joe Rogan, but middle class male white youth have it EASY unless they are debt-ridden or white ethnics.
Apparently, you haven't read the backstory of how Rogan set it up that she couldn't even though she agreed to. Rogan always knew he was going to endorse Trump.
That sounds familiar, but I think she and Rogan both had scheduling conflicts. I also think Rogan considers Trump the lesser of two evils: he doesn't LIKE Forrest Trump.
Everyone thinks that OTHER people have it easy.
True, but there are different levels of affluent and oppressed: middle class white male youth are not the 0.01% (who are 50 people) but they could rise to it.
Get off the “what is wrong with Democrats” trope! I am from a deep red state, Texas. I have reared two sons, now young men. They are not blighted by feminism nor are they such fragile flowers that they cower in the presence of strong women. In my family we are respectful and proud: of men and women. It is time to relieve all men and women in America of the burden imposed by the white patriarchy. This country is the only major world power that has never had a female head of state. So, yes I care deeply about my young men, but I also respect them. I don’t coddle them. And I expect them to see people as people, respect differences and appreciate strength in both women and men.
To be fair, female heads of state in the West are tokens who are selected to distract from the hell women go through every day of their lives: i.e. Kim Campbell, Theresa May, and I forget the name of the one who replaced Boris Johnson then resigned.
This seems Like propaganda I won’t lie. Decenter men as much as you can.
I agree with you that men are NOT being marginalized, given the fact that Gamergater-esque attitudes have been promoted since 1960s exploitation films.
It's important to note that what you're talking about is pandering. And it is also demographics, which is more important.
What's important is that the left has allowed the right wing to DEFINE men. Which is, lacking empathy, proudly ignorant, and holding baseless grievances against everyone. The left has had no weapons against this.
The left has a Ryan Gosling Problem. For years Gosling was respected as a great actor that no one wanted to see in movies, and who chased his muse in small independent films. But the truth was, Gosling was always trying to sell out -- he was just bad at it. And now, as a leading man, he still hasn't gotten anywhere. His greatest success is playing an accessory to Barbie.
The Democrats need to SELL OUT. How do you do that? You create a counterpoint to the right in male-dominated spaces -- sports and video games and wherever else men congregate. And the key isn't to provide an ALTERNATIVE, but to emphasize something important... these manosphere guys are STUPID. They're garbage people, petty and dumb and oblivious to the outside world. You don't need a Theo Von -- you need someone that replaces Theo Von. The left has had a No Bro Policy, when in fact you can develop Good Bros. The ones you describe in this article are good. Those people need to be spotlighted more, before they vote for Trump.
But let's make something perfectly clear. Yes, there should be more outreach towards young men, more messaging that takes them into account as having the potential to be unique, extraordinary. But the men who did vote for Trump, who follow the NELK Boys and Andrew Tate and all these podcast nihilists, who think Joe Rogan is "onto something"... these men and boys are repugnant people. There should be no acceptance of the sin of voting for Donald Trump, who himself has done far more to damage the idea of young men as a demographic than any failed messaging on the left's part.
What should be emphasized is that, as far as a classical male archetype, Donald Trump is Not It. He's a scared little boy who knows nothing. He's a rapist -- being a man used to mean dealing with rapists on your own, in a medieval manner. That's not morally acceptable, but it's a lot more defensible than putting a bunch (literally a bunch!) of rapists and rape apologists in the cabinet. No one wanted to engage with Donald Trump on the issue of masculinity, and instead you had sideshows like the barely-there Joe Biden, or Gavin Newsom wasting his time with a debate with Boy Ron DeSantis on Fox News. Voices like Jamie Raskin and Cory Booker and Hakeem Jeffries are not the level of popularity their counterparts on the right are.
Masculinity has to be lifted up to a level to which we aspire. Right now it's something to which you sink. This shouldn't be hard. The Right are putting pathetic puppet men on display and calling that masculinity. Respond to it in kind. You might have to pander a bit, and I personally hate that. But you can pander and still remind the world that these manosphere guys are the scum we wipe off our shoes. The left is losing ground online to the likes of Charlie Kirk and Jack Posobiec. That's utterly pathetic.
Fromtheyardtothearthouse.substack.com
ALL white male youth voted for Trump, independents, or stayed home: we CANNOT not have outreach to them. We NEED outreach to them, and many would have voted for the Democrats if they didn't throw Biden under the bus.
If a massive majority of young white males can't be talked out of this hateful right wing garbage, maybe the country doesn't deserve to survive. I'm gambling on the idea that they can.
Fromtheyardtothearthouse.substack.com
White. Privileged boys, who were born in 3rd base have trouble with kids who can hit a triple or a home run…. Maybe because without privilege they would be bench warmers. Privileged boys are soft
I would add the same “forgotten”demographic is older males. I know several who voted for Trump (previously voted democrat) because he showed respect in his message for the male image, which they were raised with in the 1950s, resonated. Felt more emphasis on the Democratic side was women’s and LBGQT+ issues. Men struggle to find their place in Democratic messaging.
The Democrats talked about reproductive rights, the economy, transgender and same sex rights, the environment, the labour movement, healthcare, welfare, and dark money. Seniors are marginalized due to the cult of youth, but the youth are NOT.
Gag. Come on. Respect these guys. They are not the fragile flowers you describe. Not the men I know.
Hi Olivia - thanks for writing about this. This has become a big area of focus in my life - not so much for winning political campaigns, but for making our world better.
Framing this kind of talk can be challenging. This interview I did with Vox captures my perspective and my work pretty well: https://www.vox.com/even-better/24097641/andrew-tate-masculinity-teens-boys-men-talk-conversations
I never knew who Tate was before mid-late 2023, and I doubt anyone takes seriously influencers who pretend they are smart by saying misogynistic things. People are interested in people who only talk about the actual issues like the economy.
Bullshit-tired of coddling the Joe Rogan cult!!
Thank you for proving my point Patty.
You had no point!!! Except to set women back to the 50’s!!
I did see that she became concerned because her white male friends were rightists and radical centrists and she wanted them to vote New Democrat: whilst it is true poverty stricken white males and white ethnic males go through hell every day of their lives (I should have said middle class white ETHNIC males do have it hard, since Italians and eastern Europeans would be seen as criminals and Catholics are hated), the middle class has it easy like Joe Biden said in 2018.
Her point is Democrats need to win elections.
If they want to win elections, they should NOT have thrown Biden under the bus and instead gotten rid of the Bernie Bros: they should have also tried to advocate introducing their policies on the municipal level since the Republicans don't like Big Government and are rugged individualists. Democrats can compromise by giving corporate citizenship to unions, guilds, small businesses, and associations (like gun clubs), introduce strict paperwork laws like in East Asia to make sure gun owners are mentally stable to carry guns, and relieve discomfort over gender affirming care by advocating chemical transition rather than surgery. They can also work with Republicans to end tokenism, the affirmative action policies for the white working class which were designed to keep out minorities and women, stop minorities and the poor by being hired by whiteys who want to exploit them, greenwashing, and pinkwashing, as well as crack down on Chinese, North Korean, Cuban, Venezuelan, and eastern European ex-communist (the Guccifers) interference on behalf of Bernie Bros and implicitly Trump (obviously the Stupublicans will never agree to investigate Trump). In order to appease Republican gerrymandering, the Democrats can agree to organize districts by population and ethnicity.
There is NO reason to appease affluent white male youth.
I fail to see what problems white middle class male youth face, except for those who are in debt-ridden families (i.e. parents losing jobs due to the 2007 crisis or forcing to sell the farm because the plant closed). I care about poverty-stricken white males, but you conflate the middle class with them.
She didn’t say pander to them , she didn’t say abandon Democrats values , she said make sure they hear the Democrats message re jobs, education, health care and how it will affect them compared to the alternative choice . Surely that is worth doing to save democracy?
I support getting the message out to Trump supporters, but don't act like affluent white male youth are suffering.
I agree Joe Rogan is overrated.
I have a ton of issues with this piece. Of course Harris included "young men" in her economic proposals – they were all-inclusive. The loss of the young white male vote seemed based on the fact that they are not being singled out as special by Democrats and are experiencing panic over things like "DEI," which is being specifically misdefined and sold as a threat to them. And since all DEI means is "merit-based, not identity-based" the right has successfully told them that their unearned privilege is under attack (which it is). It's an effective message because society has told young white men forever that they are owed special privilege. These so-called "cultural spaces" attract these young white men BECAUSE they tell them they are still special and deserve more than others.
Since Democrats are already telling voters that they want to make things better for EVERYONE, I don't see a lot positive in singling out white men for special attention while Black women do most of the hard work and still have to work harder to get anywhere. In this climate, where supports for everyone else are being abolished by government fiat someone has to stand up for those who aren't white, straight, male, affluent and "Christian."
I care about young men and believe men need all the things all humans do--love, communication, purpose, safety, friendship. BUT I also have to acknowledge that "what about the men???" is a deliberate trolling campaign designed to make weak hearted liberals feel anxious and impotent. I had some idiot tell me on LinkedIn today that posting about Martin Luther King Jr. on MLK day wasn't "inclusive". Young men matter. But they are also MEN not babies and are capable of making intelligent, empathetic choices. Many are choosing not to. I can only watch so many clips of Fresh and Fit before I want to hurl.
We the People...that means all of us regardless of any of the labels society has been so gungho about. WE need to stop labeling individuals. WE are all Americans. Can we disagree about how to get to the things we all really agree upon? Of course, but all of the divisions are in the way. Get rid of those, and things become easier to see and deal with. The hard work is to remember that we are all human beings who want the same things: to be happy, feel loved and included, have a good paying job, a roof over our heads, food on the table, money in savings, quality healthcare, and for others and our government to stay out of our personal lives. No one should care what religion you adhere to or if you aren't religious. No one should care who you love. All most want is to be treated equally. Everyone paying their fair share because it is what is right to support what is in the best interests of all, not just ourselves. The Common Good.