The specifics of gender dynamics, especially as illustrated by the widely circulated graph depicting the diverging worldviews of young men and women, merit a closer examination.
This graph, a product of recent research, highlights an accelerating trend of divergence that, although surprising to some, aligns with the expectations of those incredibly and overly online and on platforms like TikTok and Twitter (I am in this camp).
The thread that discusses this research.
Initially, I intended to place this section at the end; however, it seemed more appropriate at the beginning after writing, as it encapsulates the vibe I frequently referred to throughout the essay. Hopefully, placing this at the front provides further context as you read on…
If you end up upset by this essay… this was my intention.
If you end up categorizing me as merely another man with opinions, blind to his own privilege, you might be right. Why might you be right? Aren’t we all a little bit blind to our relations with intersectionality and oppression, thus blind to our privilege? This is how the structure works, it keeps parts of our connections and relations in the shadows so we seek out each other’s throats in the name of protecting our identity.
The system has us seeking out the tiniest of moral wins to guarantee that we all lose.
Should I remain silent? Maybe. But I won’t. Not my vibe.
I’m someone who finds this research both troubling and unsurprising. After writing this, I’m wondering if it’s necessary to constantly sprinkle my rant/discourse with endless acknowledgments of ‘recognizing my privilege,’ or to continuously apologize, catering to the belief that these are prerequisites for allyship.
Or can we move beyond these performative gestures and genuinely express our thoughts and feelings without the need for these disclaimers that often detract from the core message, its delivery, and the potential to reach certain audiences?
I don’t know if I succeed in this! But I wish to make this discourse intriguing, maybe even provocative.
Have you wondered why figures like Andrew Tate resonate so strongly with young men? It’s not merely about the content of his message. He has a vibe. I mean fuck…Tate projects the image of a wealthy British gay man, seemingly at odds with the demographic he appeals to. Thus, I think it’s how he is saying it: it’s the anger and conviction with which he says it. The arrogance. He injects his viewpoints with a raw, unfiltered passion, embodying a certain authenticity in his otherwise misguided and uninformed stances.
See… my urge for a clarifier returns… I think Tate is trash, just so we’re clear.
But, he’s unapologetic in his convictions. He’s an arrogant fucking asshole. He performs magic with his words.
I try to be my own arrogant fucking asshole to my conceptualizations of my own identity. My desire is for us to recognize the vast intersections within our lives, to challenge and dismantle our perceived truths, and to reconstruct. And then continue to reconstruct.
This is the singularity of our being! We must vibe right into our singularities!
Whether we admit it to ourselves or not, I believe our deepest drives and desires are fueled by the urge to destroy and break free from binaries, to embrace our curiosity for change and uncertainty.
Well then…
Back to the study…
I found the global extent of this divergence particularly striking.
Critics may point to the global variance in conservatism to question the data's validity, yet it's crucial to distinguish between philosophical conservatism and political conservatism (in my opinion). The former often precedes the latter, rooted in a desire to maintain what is perceived as societal or group norms. Individuals gravitate towards conservative philosophy as a means of defending an identity they perceive as being under threat from cultural shifts.
This might be a more modern trend given the more reactionary politics that we are seeing.
But this trend is underscored by the role of smartphones and social media, which, through their endless streams of information, have led young men and women to inhabit separate virtual spaces, thereby shaping distinct cultural experiences and understandings.
The impact of the virtual world on our real-life interactions is often underestimated. Social media platforms, by curating personalized content, function as a mirror that intensifies our existing beliefs, reshaping our perceptions, values, desires, and motivations. This dynamic has contributed to a polarization of male political identity, with a notable division between those holding extreme conservative views and those advocating for progressive positions, eroding the middle ground.
And the graph under discussion seems to corroborate these insights even further.
Now, the influence of social media on this phenomenon cannot be overstated…
But I don’t think it’s providing enough context for this.
I think, to some extent, we have a messaging problem occurring. We are emotional creatures that build our understanding of truth, to some extent, on vibes.
I’m wondering if leftist academia has somewhat distanced itself from a broad segment of our society, particularly young men, by concentrating intensely on issues of gender, sexuality, and race (these are important issues just to make that clear and avoid people making stupid comments) without contextualizing the message for young cis-men.
If you label a broad cohort as privileged oppressors, throughout their formative years, without acknowledging the instances where they themselves might feel oppressed—thus overlooking the principles of intersectionality—then you're fundamentally misunderstanding the objective of deconstructing and evaluating identity.
I hate that I feel the need to clarify this… I’m not trying to stick up for these young men. I’m not conservative in any facet of my worldview. The reality is this is an issue and we need men on our side or all the papers and research people do around intersectionality will be completely and utterly useless. Honestly, it likely already serves its purpose, as I am certain that more people read my little Substack than those who read those papers.
People need to believe in it. And the vibe of messaging isn’t always about the truth or who has the best argument. You’ve gotta be able to create a vibe. You have to create that by interacting and creating for the public. The vibe! I’ve struggled in creating this as well… I have harsh pieces about the manosphere that I need to evaluate, as in those pieces, I would often critique their intelligence and shame them. Maybe that isn’t the vibe.
Maybe it’s the language they speak. I don’t know.
Okay back to some of the main points…
Intersectionality isn't just about highlighting the multifaceted nature of oppression; it's also about recognizing that people can be privileged in some contexts while simultaneously facing oppression in others. By failing to consider the nuanced realities of individuals' lives, we risk perpetuating a one-dimensional analysis that not only alienates those it seeks to critique but also oversimplifies the complex dynamic of human experience.
This oversight can hinder meaningful dialogue and progress by ignoring the complexities inherent in every individual's identity, thereby missing an opportunity to foster a more inclusive and empathetic understanding of the diverse ways in which societal structures impact lives.
Maybe this hyper-focus on gender, sexuality, and race, while not diminishing the critical importance of intersectionality—a concept in feminist theory and sociology recognizing the multifaceted layers of oppression leading to unique individual experiences—may inadvertently sideline discussions that resonate with a wider audience.
I recall, possibly from Rey Chow's analysis, a critique on the issue of universalizing narratives across diverse groups. This approach can often overlook the varied and at times contradictory experiences among individuals. This problem becomes stark in the discourse surrounding the privileges of cisgender men, who are frequently perceived as a monolithic group, thereby neglecting significant variables like socio-economic status.
I think we forget that the ultimate trump card in determining hierarchy in our society is economic class. Class-based wealth is the currency that is allowed to talk in our culture.
And economic class is at the foundation of intersectionality (something that is often left out of the current discourse).
The study I mentioned likely points to a trend where men, feeling marginalized and drifting towards conservatism, are predominantly from lower-income, heterosexual backgrounds.
They hear privilege and wonder, what privilege? I’m a farm kid from the Midwest. I’ve listened to many many of the exact people I’m discussing. Many. The current frame of messaging around this conversation of intersectionality will not reach them. I promise you.
By disproportionately emphasizing gender and intensely fixating on the presumed privilege of certain groups, while neglecting to consistently contextualize these discussions within the broader economic framework that underpins the hierarchy of class, we alienated these men.
This oversight in our discourse not only simplifies the multifaceted nature of identity and oppression but also overlooks the critical intersection where gender and economic class converge. The failure to acknowledge the intricate ways in which economic structures shape experiences of privilege and oppression exacerbates the feeling of alienation among these individuals.
As a result, without a nuanced understanding that accounts for both the gendered and economic dimensions of identity, we inadvertently push these men toward ideologies that seem to validate their feelings of being overlooked. The vibe was more approachable for them because they weren’t being told about how they must take a backseat and recognize their privilege.
To foster a more inclusive and comprehensive dialogue, it’s necessary that we broaden our focus to include the interplay of economic class within our discussions on gender and privilege.
I suppose my point is that if we fail to do this… we will continue to lose men. And those men will someday be entering an age bracket that actually votes…
It’s then we will feel the ramifications of their alienation and anger.
Still… I find the reaction by men largely reactionary. I also think this is what modern conservatives have become, as they seem to fail at knowing what it is, and what way of life—they are attempting to conserve.
Now, that I’m writing about this… the internet left is also largely full of brain-dead reactionaries, just like conservatives.
Hmm… maybe an essay for another day.
Anyway…
If intersectionality seeks to delve into the collective experiences of oppression. While it’s essential to acknowledge when certain groups endure more marginalization, it's also vital to confront the gaps in our current discourse.
My rant is about trying to find those gaps…
I feel as though we’re forgetting that intersectionality involves all of us.
Presently, this discourse seems inadequate in fostering a cohesive understanding of justice and equality.
But let’s put that aside for a second.
The current dialogue often fails to address how a white male from a low-income background might navigate both privilege and oppression, challenging the oversimplified binary notion of systemic advantage.
The rising conservatism among young men, motivated by an urge to uphold what they perceive as traditional norms, showcases how personal experiences can significantly shape the wider societal narrative, prioritizing the influence of narrative over empirical evidence.
The narrative is the vibes I keep talking about.
This alienation arises from a dominant narrative that categorizes them as benefactors of a patriarchal system, a position they often do not feel reflects their reality. I feel like people would understand this more if they’d go outside and touch grass! (A reminder for me as well)
This discrepancy intensifies the crisis, as our collective efforts have fallen short in guiding young men through their unique journeys. Consequently, many find solace in reactionary ideologies, which offer the allure of simplicity in the face of complexity. And it’s easy to protect our identity when we double down on the simplicity of a proposed narrative or worldview.
The path forward remains unclear. I do not hold the answers…
But I’m another white dude with opinions. And for those that have been consuming my stuff for a while… you know that I do not wish to see this trend found in the research to continue for men.
Nevertheless, a pivotal reevaluation of how we comprehend identity binaries is essential, pushing us towards a deeper, more nuanced understanding that transcends the oversimplified categorizations currently dominating our discourse.
At our roots… we are all queer!
So, while intersectionality aimed to deconstruct binary views, it has paradoxically created a new binary that leaves many young men feeling sidelined. The legitimacy of these feelings aside, the crucial issue lies in the entrenched dichotomy of right versus wrong, us versus them, which exacerbates the problems.
The term "culture war" might be contentious (I hate the phrase), yet it highlights the essential role of persuasion and rhetoric in my mind. You’ve gotta vibe to win some battles.
Only using academic language around this stuff can become fucking lame. I’ve done it as well! How can create new terms and new understandings by using such dry words that read as though they’re full of melatonin?
And left-leaning academia IS losing ground in this arena, struggling to connect with the younger generation of men (Spend time within the cesspools of Twitter for further context). You must speak the language of men to have them even consider opening up to evaluating their identity…
I mean damn… it took a large combination of drugs, ADHD fueled hyper-fixation, and discussions with people to even begin to grasp the nuance around our sense of identity. And my process of understanding this stuff is only beginning, I know.
To reiterate: our societal critiques, especially those addressing young men, have often failed to align with their individual realities. The reliance on abstracted language might not faithfully mirror lived experiences, further muddling discussions on privilege and oppression.
Societal hierarchies endure largely because they are perceived as tangible.
We must set the vibe to then destroy their tangibility!
Okay…
Stay curious. Stay multiple.
Great article
Fantastic article! Very deep insight. It’s so important to understand how the current culture is influencing us. Thank you!
Also is it helps…. I’ve 3 sons ages 26, 30, & 32 (all still at home, but working and on their own paths) plus a step son in college, age 20. We are all white Cisgender, and therefore in my view privileged. But to them they view themselves as just… themselves. Not more or less than anyone else. They realize that a lot of social media platforms can be dumpster fires. They try not to be reactionary.
That gives me hope, in this generations future. And by extension, the next generations youth.
Thanks again for your many thought provoking articles.