If liberals don't contest it, the right's view of masculinity wins
A subscriber urges us to take the fight to the right.
Editor's note: On Tuesday, I asked subscribers to tell me what they think about Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico's remarks on the meaning of being a man. You can read that post here. I got some great responses, and I hope there are more to come, but for now, one stood out. It's from a subscriber who wants to be known as "a lawyer and citizen."
He sets Talarico's comment in the context of the White House UFC fight and urges liberals to bring the gender fight directly to the opposition, and do so in terms they will understand: "Is it manly to bend the knee in the face of vicious attacks on your wife and father? Is it some sort of masculine ideal to cheat on your wife, and cheat by trading as an insider?" And so on.
While there are downsides to this argument – for instance, are women and others acting "manly" when they live decent lives according to a code of honor – but I'm going to leave it there for now. Again, let me know what you think in the comments below. Onward! – JS
(PS: Leave something nice in the tip jar. All tips go to paying July's rent. Thanks!)
A lawyer and citizen writes:
This is really important, particularly coming as it does in the aftermath of the White House UFC spectacle. I hold with Talarico’s vision of masculinity, which resembles Tim Walz’s, Wes Moore’s and (for all his flaws) Scott Galloway’s — a man takes care of his people, in the form of his family, his community, his country.
There is a countervailing picture of masculinity, though, and the UFC fights are representative — it is combative, individualistic, selfish, hierarchical, arrogant, vengeful and a list of other adjectives that fit comfortably within this list.
Obviously, Talarico, with his boyish face and calm demeanor, does not reflect that latter image. He can eat all the brisket he wants, but it won’t keep the Ted Cruzs and Ken Paxtons from calling him effeminate (even gay), vegan (not that there’s anything wrong with that choice, but it’s coded for “I’m so un-masculine that I won’t even exercise my God-given right to sit atop the food chain”), “Soy Boy” and the like. It’s of a piece with the “Tampon Tim” label that the right slapped on Tim Walz two years ago — a label that he got because his administration exercised the former model of masculinity by caring for its citizens.
John Stoehr
It's not a whole lot different than the models of “Christianity” being offered in the public sphere. Christ only appeared in the New Testament with a message of love, but most of the “Christians” in public life worship an Old Testament God, who was much more about laws and vengeance — think the Beatitudes versus the Ten Commandments
So it seems to me that we have to engage this conversation by asking similar hard questions about, eg, Ted Cruz’s, Ken Paxton’s, Lindsey Graham’s (yes, I know) manliness. Is it manly to bend the knee in the face of vicious attacks on your wife and father? Is it some sort of masculine ideal to cheat on your wife, and cheat by trading as an insider? Is it manly to live as what appears to be a highly closeted gay man while supporting policies that make the lives of other gay men and women much harder?
It is not enough to cry “hypocrite!” We must fight the “coding” that tells us that what we saw at the White House was the only legitimate version of masculinity. It’s not going to be easy — John Wayne and Gary Cooper still dominate the visions of masculinity in America — but it has to be done. Not just because of politics, but because the ancient view of masculinity is going to doom most men to failures in life and in their interpersonal relationships.
I know you like it. I know you'll love the price! For just $9 a month, you get so much, plus the satisfaction of supporting independent journalism. (Don't know if you're a subscriber? Check your status below.) –JS
