What Exactly Do We Owe Young Men?
The question that never has a good answer.
[This blog will always be free to read, but it’s also how I pay my bills. If you have suggestions or feedback on how I can earn your paid subscription, shoot me an email: cmclymer@gmail.com. And if this is too big of a commitment, I’m always thankful for a simple cup of coffee. And yes, I’m available for Pride Month speaking engagements.]
This weekend, while waiting to board an early flight, I was mindlessly scrolling social media—always a healthy activity—and I came across one of the more bizarre online arguments I've seen in a while, which is saying something.
At issue were the before-and-after photos posted by a gentleman who was proud to highlight his fitness progress.
The 'before' photo showed the gentleman pretty fit but what some might describe as husky. The 'after' photo showed him with substantially lower body fat and much more defined muscles.
None of that really matters, which is why I don't feel the need to post the photos here.
Where things got heated was when numerous women replied to the photos expressing a preference for his body in the 'before' image.
And I thought: yeah, that definitely tracks. I'm personally not attracted to males, but I have a lot of straight and bisexual girlfriends who DO, in fact, prefer huskier men, and more than a few of them have openly said gym bros are a turn-off.
I also have girlfriends who DO prefer really muscular, toned men like in the 'after' image and are quite attracted to the gym bro physique.
It turns out, shockingly, that women are not a monolith and have quite diverse views and tastes, which, unsurprisingly, is an offensive concept for a lot of males, many of whom proceeded to spend considerable energy telling these women that they were wrong and they're supposed to be attracted to hyper-muscular physiques.
They were angry. They were genuinely affronted. They had been conditioned to believe that only men with ripped, toned, sculpted bodies are truly more attractive to women, and yet, suddenly, here were a lot of women saying: "Actually, no, I prefer his huskier body."
These women weren't saying the more toned and muscular body is unattractive. They weren't saying anyone else has to share their opinion. They were just pointing out their preference — you know, like men literally do in regards to women all the time.
I was genuinely taken aback by the furious replies from outraged straight men, some of whom thought all these women—independent from each other—were somehow conspiring in a massive trolling effort.
It had to be a prank, you see, and if it wasn't a prank, these women are crazy and don't actually know what they want. And if they truly have this preference, they have to be in the minority and don't represent most women. Or maybe they’re not women worth hearing out.
Let's recap: a bunch of women, who didn't know each other, offered their preference for a male body outside of what's expected from the online brosphere, and these males, acolytes of said brosphere, lost their shit when confronted with direct evidence that a lot of women might—just might—have other priorities in their attraction toward men.
I found it all disturbing because it viscerally points to a much deeper problem.
There is a massive, grifting cult in American society that revolves around telling millions of angry, lonely, emotionally-stunted males, particularly young males, that there is only one kind of man they should strive to be and that model of manliness is what really attracts women.
To an extent, that sentiment has always existed, but I don't think it's ever had such widespread ideological intensity that constantly veers into extremism.
These males were furious at the veil being lifted from their eyes and clued into the reality that women actually have a wide range of preferences in male bodies, and for many women, gym bros aren't ideal.
Because if all these women are telling the truth about being attracted to the huskier version of this guy's body, maybe other bits of "wisdom" from the brosphere don't hold water.
Maybe a lot straight and bisexual women truly don't want kids and truly have no desire to be married and are truly happier with these choices.
Maybe a lot of these women aren't especially concerned with money and materialism.
Maybe a lot of these women have an attraction to males that prioritizes other factors in their calculus: character, temperament, openness, humor, etc., and maybe a male's body can be more or less attractive depending on those other variables.
Maybe a lot of these women are really attracted to males who have considerable listening skills, and their body, toned or husky, becomes sexier through that prism.
I know all this seems low-stakes for some people, but I promise it's not.
Much of the discourse around last year’s election has been centered in the persistently vague assertion that Democrats don’t know how to talk to young men, and that’s why Vice President Harris lost.
Every time I’ve heard someone express this opinion, I’ve asked them what they believe young men need to hear from Democrats, and I’ve never gotten an answer that makes sense. Not even close.
Some folks have gamely attempted to point out that young men are feeling economic pressure — housing and employment and student loans, etc.—but when I point out that young women are also feeling economic pressure and Vice President Harris did, in fact, speak to economic pressures facing all young people, I’m told I don’t get it.
When I ask them what I don’t get, please explain it to me, they typically get flustered and it becomes clear that they’re parroting a critique they’ve heard from others but have neither a coherent argument to back it up nor any reasonable suggestions for what Democrats should be doing in specifically speaking to young men.
Don’t get me wrong: I can understand the obvious allure of this claim. It’s spicy yet unsolicitous on multiple fronts. It speaks to the ongoing “crisis of masculinity” handwringing that’s becoming a popular think-piece genre, bashes Democratic lawmakers for inaction, and conveniently absolves young men from any responsibility.
Young men are in trouble—although it remains unclear why they’re facing greater burdens than young women—and the feminists and the academics and the Democrats and that girl who declined your prom invite back in the day are all to blame.
How are they to blame? That remains unclear, too. When you dig for answers to that question, you’ll be treated to a lot of rhetorical tap-dancing and some implications on social discomfort and eventually anger and frustration.
Again, we’re not sure why young men have it especially hard, but they do. Just trust us.
There’s a quote from Chuck Palahniuk’s Fight Club that I’ve always found interesting and may sum up the “crisis of American masculinity” in fewer than forty words better than anywhere else:
“We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off.”
At the core of the “masculinity crisis” nonsense is a prevailing, taught, crushing desperation in millions of males in this country who get violently angry at the claim or implication that doing all the things the brosphere tells them to do might not actually be effective in attracting women.
That being a good person might, in fact, be a priority for most women over a male's physique or career or personal vehicle or how much they have in the bank.
That maybe while all these males will insist they tried the "good person" approach and women weren't into it, they might actually realize, deep down, they never really tried to be good people because it was an uncomfortable hassle and the brosphere offers a fount of excuses to ignore that lingering, inconvenient truth.
The Andrew Tates and the Joe Rogans and all their imitators give young men an enormous wealth of excuses and no shortage of people to blame for their own failure to do work on themselves but more importantly: a shield from the very basic of work of being an empathetic adult.
I do feel bad for many young men in our country. I feel bad for young men who try to do right by others, be proactive in their empathy, work hard, avoid the allure of the “soft bigotry of low expectations” and somehow get erased from this annoying, vague, nonsensical conversation on American masculinity being in crisis.
Those young men don’t count in this conversation because their views would be far too inconvenient to a movement that thrives on making young men out to be victims based on undefined forces at work against them — and, of course, a complicit political media landscape that doesn’t get clicks and views from pointing this out.
Yes, there is a growing masculinity crisis in our society, but it's not because young men aren't being heard. It's because too many young men are taught to be outraged over the suggestion that being a good person is at the core of what it means to be a good man.
We’re now told that asking young men to do the bare minimum in listening to others, especially women, is a grave sin.
I’m not buying it.
And while I think fitness is certainly important and encourage young men to explore healthy habits at the gym, might I suggest to them the benefits of therapy and active listening skills, too?
"Doing all the things the brosphere tells [young men] to do might not actually be effective in attracting women." My experience suggests that most women, in fact, find such posturing off-putting. This piece nails it on so many levels! You rock, Charlotte!
I think this is the tip of the iceberg of a larger conversation, Charlotte. I've done a bit of research on "The Trouble with Boys" and related topics. Educationally speaking, the data are showing a larger gap between boys' and girls' performance on academic tests (girls are performing better), among other data points. The whys of that are less clear. In conversations with colleagues we've noted that more women are graduating from college then men, more women are in leadership positions, more women are coaching men. For women, we feel we're ready for it. Beyond ready for it. We've been taught by fantastic women leaders how to climb the ladder of success. It's been hard, and it's still hard, even harder now, but we have a path. However, men have not had a path to learning how to be led or coached by women. In some cases, even working beside women is new in some careers. Are boys being taught how to navigate this changing dynamic? Societally speaking, boys are still raised to be boys, empowered to lead, to be bosses, but not how to do it side by side with their female peers. Until we raise our sons to take direction from women as often as they do men, I fear there will continue to be men who are affronted by women with opinions that differ from their own. And, I speak in generalities about the situation in the U.S., of course. There are plenty of fantastic men who are able and willing to support women leaders.