We Need to reimagine masculinity and ask why men are supporting Trump
Regardless of the outcome of the November 5 election, consistent polls predict a massive gender gap in support between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. Men are more likely to vote for Trump, women more likely to vote for Harris. All over the world, it is mainly men who are driving the rise of authoritarian strongmen and far-right politicians. This is evident at the ballot box and also shown by their financial support.
It is also apparent in attitudes. Recent surveys on social values show that a chasm between the genders is emerging, particularly among younger voters. Gen-Z women are more socially progressive, while Gen-Z men tend to be more regressive. This contrasts with previous generations, where both sexes shared broadly similar views and values, for example on issues such as abortion rights, migrant rights and LGBTQ rights. The split in Gen- Z male and female voters could be one of the storylines that defines next week’s election.
Which is why, on the eve of the historic vote, it seems important to ask: What’s wrong with men, how did we get here, and can we change this?
The crisis of patriarchy
We live in a world ruled by patriarchy, while interwoven with other oppressions. As a result, men (especially white men) are expected to dominate. Yet this is to the detriment of almost everyone—including men.
From birth, boys are raised to speak most strongly in the language of violence. “Boys will be boys” fighting on video games, in playground brawls and the rest. All of these are preparations for the aggressive roles that are ultimately revered.
In the patriarchal narrative, police or armed forces are considered top jobs for men, sanctioned to dole out violence on behalf of the state, both at home and abroad. But the capitalist world also rewards a ruthlessly selfish way of being, based on the principle of “dog eat dog.”
The fluency with which men communicate through violence might explain why there is an epidemic of violence in our culture: an epidemic of street violence mainly perpetrated by men against men, of domestic violence mainly perpetrated by men against women, and of suicide, mainly perpetrated by men against themselves.
On top of that, we are told from an early age that “men do not cry,” which only accelerates mental health problems and bottles up anger to be released in violence. Men fill the prisons and are the majority of street homeless. We are doing worse in education and failing on many more metrics, not least dying earlier than women.
In a world where everyone else is oppressed for the benefit of the 1%, patriarchy intersects with other oppressions such as class and race, structuring an unequal and unjust society. It seems important to clarify that the point is not that men are the most oppressed group by the patriarchy; rather, we too are oppressed by it and would do far better without it.
Despite all this, the trick of Trump and other far-right movements, according to sociologist Michael Kimmel, is to hone in on the insecurities of male identity to recruit support. The right’s narrative suggests the world is unfair since it is not fulfilling the supposed promises of patriarchy: male domination.
Yet these proponents entirely ignore the multiple toxic impacts of patriarchy; their so-called answer is to demand more of the same. The right wants to roll back all the hard fought rights of women, with a particular obsession on reproductive rights.
But this is only part of the trick. From the Alt-Right to the Incel movement, and from Trump’s average supporters to other far-right movements on the rise elsewhere, there is something else happening. Many commentators have noted that it is predominantly the political right that is talking about how to be a man in the first place.
From the socially progressive perspective, there is a lot written about how not to be a man, but far less on how to be one.
The consequence of this is that there are many confused men, especially young ones. Trump and his ilk attract them by exploiting their feelings of insecurity in an unjust, individualistic world. The meme that “men are trash,” which is only often true because the patriarchy makes many men act badly, further prompts men to support Trump or other movements that oppose the deconstruction of the patriarchy.
Researchers have found that to captivate the interests of young men, many misogynistic spokesmen – podcasters, influencers, politicians and the like – lure them in with simple ideas like “clean your room” and other non-controversial tips.
From there, the spokespeople quickly pull young men down misogynistic rabbit holes. In contrast, while there are discussions about how to be a male ally against patriarchy, this dialogue is not as broad or as far-reaching.
Reimagining men and man-kind
The election is on a knife’s edge between Harris and Trump. The males of Gen-Z could make the difference. So, if you know one, they need a conversation, and they need it fast. These men especially need the space to discuss why they feel insecure in the world, how it relates to their masculinity, and then a frank enough discussion about how Trump is not the answer to any of those insecurities.
Looking further ahead, far more needs to be discussed to create what a healthy masculinity looks like. This society-wide journey will be relevant whichever way the election goes – even if the results vastly alter the terrain we need to traverse across.
Where could we start? If the man the right and far-right idolized is a brave soldier or cop, should the alternative be someone brave enough to save lives as well? Consider a firefighter, a paramedic or a coast guard. Or even someone brave enough to break social taboos, like a nursery school assistant, a nurse or a care specialist.
If the traditional man is exalted for providing and protecting his kin and family, could a healthy masculinity reflect someone who wants to protect society and the planet? A toxic masculinity suggests a person needs to be the strongest in the room. Perhaps, instead, a healthy masculinity is one where men are strong enough to embrace a world that’s less familiar than the one they’ve always known.
Joining and training with a mountain rescue team is one of the best routes in for finding male identity. Combine that with the increasing need for people skilled in search and rescue following increasingly frequent and severe global warming caused climate disasters such as that currently in Spain and this just makes such obvious sense. So, a plea also for more funding for all our mountain rescue teams.
‘The meme that “men are trash,” ‘
A lot of women are ‘trash’ too. This would be an ideal article to define what the ‘patriarchy’ actually is; eg women dominate the publishing industry. Unfortunately, it is a self-flagellating mea culpa.
“women dominate the publishing industry.”
LOLs
The far right have always been thus. Their (weak) default view on most things is hate as anything less is seen as weak. We have to get the message back out there that they are thick c**** and anyone backslapping them is just as weak and thick.
@Tom Ultuous, I was thinking something similar. The far-right seems to have mistaken tropes from our simian cousins and conjured up a model of human society that doesn’t exist outside prisons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_and_beta_male
Of course, if your definition of prisons extends to military, care and similar institutions, then perhaps this picture seems more real to people from such backgrounds. Of course, if other people have been dressing you, making your meals, planning your schedule for most of your life, this can create effects like social blindspots, unresolved resentments, insecurity about going it alone, fear and respect of authority, reduced empathy, communication difficulties outside ingroups, and a kind of learned helplessness. And minionisation, which is the key here (an exploit rather than a healthy part of human development, I would suggest).
Tom – I agree that the far right’s strategy is to stoke up hate and division. Their main way of doing this is by spreading fear of change and anyone that is different or advocating change.
I’m not sure there is any ‘male identity’ (or ‘female identity’) in team-player roles, which are vital to our complex, abstracted societies, where specialisms allow interchangeable personnel (no-one is indispensable, everyone is valued). Male and female perspectives can be valuable in such teams but really on the level of many other life-and-experience aspects.
I’m not going to downplay violent misogyny in gaming (see Gamergate and industry scandals), but the picture is far broader and more complex than such reductive takes, and studies have so far failed to demonstrate causal links at scale between violent games and subsequent offline behaviour: the overall trend seems to be in the opposite direction. Football games now include female teams, the rise of less stereotyped female protagonists etc has been significant, though problematic portrayals are still common, and nonviolent games are perhaps more popular worldwide among broad demographics than many nonplayers realize.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate_(harassment_campaign)
The question, I think, is rather one of militarism as a component of patriarchy. The tendency to see a military option as a preferred solution; of valourising violent groups and individuals; of embracing terror (when your side does it); of supporting rape in war (ditto); of cosplaying militias and roleplaying revenge fantasies; of celebrating killing civilians; of ignoring hurt, degradation and destruction of the natural world; of mocking and despising civil norms; of supporting separate spheres and resisting integration; of having more in common with, and sometimes more respect for, opposing combatants than the people you’re supposed to protect; of revelling in uniforms, waveable weapons and parades; of choosing national myths over more objective world histories.
However, though such militia groups have much in common, there are often significant differences in ideology or recruitment which lead to cracks in their attempts to project strength through unity at national scale (divisions they may want to downplay to civilians). Far from being plainspeaking, militarists are often devious, disingenuous and deceptive in their propaganda (which is allowable and indeed considered good practice because Sun Tzu says all warfare is deception). So don’t take all their pronouncements at face value.
Good luck with these opinions in the Islamic world!
Thanks John!
Try going to an Islamic country John. When they call you habibi you might realise the exoticist view of toxic, hypermasculine men is a fantasy (to the disappointment of some fetichists)
Conservatism is “a meditation on – and theoretical rendition of – the felt experience of having power, seeing it threatened, and trying to win it back.”
— Corey Robin. The Reactionary Mind. Oxford University Press, 2011. 4.
The links that are there apparently to show the ‘chasm’ between men and women ‘Gen Zs’ are both behind paywalls. This is quite important as it becomes the basis of the article.
What is the actual evidence of an an ‘epidemic of violence in our culture’? The statement implies things are much worse than previous times and now takes on an epidemic form but no evidence is presented for this.
‘Gen Z’ is a media-constructed pigeonhole, not actually a meaningful phenomenon, though the more it is plugged the more it becomes a self-fulfilling one. Interestingly most of the men in the photos are noticeably older than anyone born from the late 1990s suggesting something wrong between perception and reality.
‘Misogyny’ – do you really mean hatred of women? The word misogyny is now routinely used to mean anything we once called sexist. There is an important and significant difference and ramping up all sexist attitudes as indicating literal hatred of women is not only false, but dimisnhes the notion of genuine misogyny.
When was the last time that it was common to tell men they don’t cry? A look round most Western societies suggests this seems quite out-of-date, a general problem with this article.
‘From the socially progressive perspective, there is a lot written about how not to be a man, but far less on how to be one’ – the most interesting and pertinent comment for me (and true in my experience) but also begs the question of who is (not) doing the telling? And is telling ever going to work anyway? ‘This is how (not) to be man’ is liable to be rejected no matter who is saying it or what they say as who really wants to be *told* how to not just behave, but be? I don’t think societies change for the better by progressives or ‘regressives’ telling anyone how they should behave any more than when a preacher does it from the pulpit.
20 years since Fight Club. Lost men rediscover themselves under the tutelage of a hypermasculine Brad Pitt. Do men need an outlet for a primitive violent side? My experience says yes… though regular sport seems to satisfy it. Indeed, I’m sure many women do too. But that’s where defining masculinity becomes difficult, if you say masculinity is strength it seems like you’re saying women are weak. Societal growing pains? Can we reach a stage where equality doesn’t require women to prove themselves in arenas once reserved for men? Young women now earn more than men, for a long time have been the majority in universities.
And on Brad Pitt in Fight Club, interesting how a hypermasculine mentor gives comfort to a man’s sense of masculinity, even if the existence of such a man is an illusion. And this came decades before Andrew Tate…
I have heard my daughters boy friend, aged 24yrs, say positive things about Trump (and he’s no fascist).
His main reason seems to be he ‘s fed up with the monolithic group-think of “the left” and likes the feeling of going against the grain of main-stream opinion and plating devils advocate; “Maybe Trump isn’t as bad as he’s painted” ,” I don’t like the way anyone supporting Trump is shut down/cancelled on-line, so I’m going to mix things up a bit”
He sees it as a game, a laugh, a meme, a stance. And a chance to be different. I even think he likes the fact that it’s a “bro” thing. Young men are bursting with testosterone, a desire to be a hero, energy and possibly a desire to fight or at least test their strength. What is the left offering to young men as a heroic lifestyle?
“Young men are bursting with testosterone, a desire to be a hero, energy and possibly a desire to fight or at least test their strength”
Sucking in and going along with the bully boys is hardly a show of strength. Why doesn’t he fight them? Has he got a season ticket for Straight Dave’s man slamming as well? And paedophiles are bursting with desire for children, but it’s not a mitigating factor.
Surely the most important qualities are those which men and women hold in common. Responsibility, empathy, a sense of humour, hard work, imagination. You could continue this list of the best human qualities endlessly without idealising masculinity or femininity.
At one stage in the 1960’s & and 70’s there was a movement to encourage choice in clothing and toys for children not to be so polarised eg. pink everything for girls and the little soldier look for boys. Sadly that went, I suspect because the retail industry sold more by pushing what they saw as “ popular” choices but this sort of trivial thinking about what a man or a woman is demeans us all as human beings.
I agree Jennie but I hope you weren’t mistaking my quote from Wul’s post as being my thoughts?
The article wonders “why men are supporting Trump”.
I provided both an example and an explanation to the question posited by the article.
Your reply (and Tom’s) illustrate why young men might be attracted to Trump-ism over left-leaning social democracy.
You both also demonstrate a lack of understanding or imagination about what makes (many) young men tick.
Don’t shoot the messenger please. I am in full agreement with you about what qualities should, ideally, be valued in both men and women. But the world ain’t ideal. And, having been a young man once, I know something of what I speak. I also spent a couple of decades as a youth worker in the company of (often troubled) young men.
What you are selling; “Responsibility, empathy, a sense of humour, hard work, imagination” just ain’t as immediately exciting as Heroism. Bravery. Invincibility. Strength. Sex. Money.
The former qualities can be experienced over time and an awareness of their importance raised by providing opportunities to experience success resulting from developing these qualities. But the latter ones are simple easier and cheaper to sell. Trump is nothing if not a salesman.
Pity we shut all the youth clubs and did away with community development and preventative programmes for young people innit? Into that vacuum (and all the other vacuums) walks Trump and all the other lying pricks.
Young men (and women) used to have a community, a people, a culture which told its own stories of heroism. We do not embue cultural identity and therefore a political identity has taken its place, largely from American talking points on the internet.
We’re a collection of people now with little in common. Nations don’t exist (or are frowned upon) so why work hard for a collective cause. Individualism is key. What young person thinks of Nov 11th for example and the sacrifices and stupidity of war? We’re losing our collective mindset which goes hand in hand with masculinity and heroism.
“Sucking in and going along with the bully boys is hardly a show of strength. Why doesn’t he fight them? ”
He is fighting the bully boys (or he thinks he is). His “bully boys” are people like you and me. Old, lefty people who know best.
@Wul, submission engine ate my comment, so I’ll boil it down to the minimum. Trump manifests incontinence, not strength: the same kind of incontinence manifested by WW2 white GIs in Britain: overspending, talking loud (bragging, insulting, complaining), overaggression, sexual predation, overdrinking: in a privileged demographic, incontinence (a weakness) may appear like freedom (at least, licence).
Wul said “You both also demonstrate a lack of understanding or imagination about what makes (many) young men tick.”
I wouldn’t go that far Wul. I’m well aware all men are w****** at 24 (many never get beyond the school playground) but could you not at least ask him why he wants to be a Roman soldier as opposed to Spartacus? In Scotland, surely it’s the independence movement that offers all the change and anti-establishment ideals and it’s the yoons who are much more likely to be Trump 2024’ers and against change.
I suppose it’s a bit like a few diehard socialists who are YES / SNP supporters I know who also support Sevco. I cannot understand how, given their politics, they’d want to be associated with all that union jack / God save the king (and, yes, Trump 2024) rubbish. If they discussed their politics with the Sevco hardcore they’d lose teeth.
‘all men are w****** at 24’
I assume this is hyperbole but even so, I would say it is wrong. Damning young men so strongly is also not going to help. Testosterone-driven masculinity, especially in the young, is not going away and cannot be suppressed either. It needs to be channelled / directed and sometimes that ‘Heroism. Bravery. Invincibility. Strength’ is in fact, exactly what is needed / wanted.
That “strength” is usually borne from stupidity. “We’ll kick Gerry’s ass and be home for Christmas.”
Tom – people are more complicated than we sometimes think.
If you support a football team from a young age it is often with you for life as it is tied up with your personal identity. I don’t support Rangers but have tried to change team I support on several occasions over a number of yearsI support due to poor results, performances and clubs attitude but I cannot as it feels as if I would be rejecting part of myself.
Are young men that different from many older men in their attitudes – not in my experience- older men seem better at hiding their attitudes when required.
What younger men need are male role models who are both obviously male and empathetic at the same time. Example- look at how many skinheads associated with bands in late 70’s when BNP was at its height. Many of these bands could have benefited from courting this audience but opted to be both antiestablishment but also firmly anti racist. This had a significant impact on many young men of my generation. These people were not regarded as role models by my parent’s generation in late 70’s which gave them more credibility to my generation.
I accept that with social media today a different approach may be required but I don’t think the underlying principles of young male role models that resonate with young males changes..
Is it possible these articles do more harm than good?
If you get out your screen for a day, noone in Scotland is even raising abortion rights as an issue, never mind disagreeing with the status quo.
Tendency to overstate issues but I agree some young men have an issue and it’s created by social media/dating changes.