Can you say “War on Men,” boys and girls?
Perhaps it’s a predictable irony that in an election cycle that could realistically deliver the first female president, so much of the commentary has been about men. Or rather, not about men exactly, but about “masculinity.” Because somehow, in 2024, we still find ourselves unable to talk about men and boys without using masculinity as the basic frame of reference.
The electorate is faced with a choice, the story goes, between two models for masculinity. Toxic versus positive. In response to the vein-popping, furious, felon model of the right, the left is offering us a more morally upstanding and expansive “positive masculinity.”
“Positive masculinity” has been around for a while. Most likely coined in early 2000s by psychologists as a way of working with male patients in therapy… Masculinity has had an unfairly bad rap, its proponents argue, becoming permanently shackled to the word “toxic.” Positive masculinity is an attempt to rebrand and reinstate it for the next generation, often with the claim that unlike the insecure posturing of the shirt-ripping strongmen, this is in fact “real” manhood.
The model is not a radical departure. Positive masculinity still draws on all the old trappings and anxieties of traditional manliness, the same belief that there is such a thing as a “real man” and the same fears of falling short. As its political standard-bearer, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, Tim Walz, is still required to constantly prove his masculine credentials.
Sorry and all, but that’s ‘cause Tampon Timmeh the Pillsbury Doughpyrsynz’s© “masculine credentials” straddle the line, reverse-cowgirl style, betwixt “laughable” and “nonexistent.” Whatever no-ball, cringing caricature of American manhood the preposterous Harris/Doughboy campaign plans to portray as “masculinity,” their dumpy, thoroughly emasculated Veep candidate is sadly lacking in anything resembling it. Case in point:
Something’s missing from this pheasant hunt in this video…. Something key. pic.twitter.com/M31KpCYX7x
— Brittany (@bccover)
Jeezum M Crow. It’s a dead cert that not one of these phony-ass punks has ever hunted pheasant—or owned a shotgun, for the matter of it—in his/her/its entire life. The paid actors/stunt hunter stand-ins all look like they just dragged a credit card through the Mordor On The Potomac (or possibly Minneapolistan) Cabela’s or Bass Pro Shop to gear themselves up with a brand new Serious Outdoorspyrsynz!™ costume for the filming of this pathetic, wholly-fraudulent joke of a campaign ad. I love what one X wag had to say in response to the question implied above: What’s missing in this video? A: Testosterone. Good one, pal.
NOTE: Link is to the Ace place, not to the original NYT article. I would never subject you good people to the horror of an NYT link, no way.
Update! Ed Driscoll reels off another knee-slapper.
OLD AND BUSTED: “Can I get me a hunting license here?”
—John Kerry, October 2004.
Heh. Indeed, Ed.
2
1
- Entries