Originally Posted by
CCitizen
I would like to begin this nanoessay by thanking Modern Conservatives for helping men retain our Humanity and Fundamental Rights in the current political climate. Then I discuss where "Liberals" and "Progressives" fall on Political Spectrum in regards to men and Masculinity.
In the modern Western Civilization, as men are facing escalating levels of discrimination and demonization, Trump Conservatives aka Strong Conservatives have been the only major political force taking even a minor stand for our rights and humanity. In 2018, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos drew lots of "Liberal" abuse and hate by restoring college men's Presumption of Innocence. Tucker Carlson did four shows on hardships faced by men. Senator Susan Collins defended Presumption of Innocence in the speech following her vote to confirm Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh. Many Democrats consider her display of Compassion for those unworthy of Compassion to be a moral crime. President Trump mentioned that it is "a dangerous time to be a man" since any man accused of Sexual Misconduct is presumed guilty. A recent NBC News article titled "Trump Voters Say Men are Discriminated Against More Than Gays, Minorities" revealed that "Forty-nine percent of Trump voters surveyed said men face either "a great deal" (18 percent) or "a fair amount" (31 percent) of discrimination in America today."
I have given some thought as to why modern Conservatism comes to defense of men and came to surprising conclusion. Classical Conservatives view men as primarily protectors and providers. Classical Conservatives believe that men should be Stoic and not complain. John Kasich definitely belongs to this school of thought.
True Liberals would view men as full Humans equal to women. As such, men must advocate for their collective rights and interests just like women advocate for theirs. There are many areas where Gender Equality would greatly benefit men -- men are discriminated in divorce, male offenders get 63% longer sentences, male DV victims are rarely helped and frequently arrested, male bashing is very common. True Liberals would not shame men for advocating for Equal Rights. True Liberals would support an ideal of man who values himself and his fellow men and expresses his grievances and vulnerability.
One reason why many Modern Conservatives defend men is that they have become much more Liberal on many issues. For instance, Modern Conservatives are supportive of LGBT -- unlike Conservatives as late as 1990s. It has been said many times that "A Liberal of 1990 is a Conservative of 2019." Being more Liberal, many Conservatives accept men stepping out of their traditional role of Stoicism.
Where do "Liberals" and "Progressives" fall in their view on male gender role? Many publications in the most respectable "Liberal" and "Progressive" media paint a clear picture of what they expect of men. They claim that every man bears unforgivable guilt for being a Privileged Oppressor and has a moral duty of unconditional loyalty to Feminism. They demand that men must police other men for Politically Incorrect speech. In Washington Post's article "Thanks for not raping us you 'good men'", the author brags about verbally abusing her husband, blames men for all social evils and writes "I announced that I hate all men and wish all men were dead." Then she demands that men organize to be "better to women". Washington Post's (another) article on why it is OK to hate men ends with a list of demands on how men must be better feminists. In "Dear dudes, you’re all trash", the author defines the highest virtue achievable by any man -- being trash which is less trashy then other men. She writes "Sure, some men are less trash, but rest assured, all men are at least diet trash.... No amount of unlearning will free them of their trashiness, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t their responsibility to get as close to zero in the trash scale as possible, especially if they insist they give a $#@!." Many "Liberal" and "Progressive" men accept their Gender Role of servants and scapegoats. These men know their place. In New York Times article #IAmSexist, Professor George Yancy states "I’m issuing a clarion call against our claims of sexist "innocence". I’m calling our "innocence" what it is — bull$#@!."
It would be interesting to locate the position of "Liberals" and "Progressives" on the Political Spectrum. If you are unfamiliar with Political Spectrum, let me remind you:
Radical -> Liberal -> Centrist -> Conservative -> Reactionary
Liberal Liberals and a growing number of New Conservatives understand that old models for male Stoicism can not work in the new reality. Conservative Conservatives and John Kasich Conservatives stand for Status Quo. They insist that men must be as Stoic as Providers and Protectors of 1950s despite the fact that they will not be appreciated.
Reactionary view of Masculinity would demand men to be as Stoic as XVIIth Century Musketeers or Medieval Knights. By the very definition, Reactionary ideal is Status Quo Ante. Many articles in "Liberal" and "Progressive" Press, like the aforementioned ones, demand a new level of Stoicism from men. They ask men to maintain unconditional loyalty to Feminism even in the face of abuse by those to whom they are loyal. That is the level of Stoicism beyond that of a Medieval Knight. "Liberal" and "Progressive" ideal for men is literally a step in the direction of Status Quo Ante which surpasses Status Quo Ante. Such an ideal is beyond Reactionary. The position to the Right of Reactionary has not yet been defined, so HyperReactionary should fill that place.
If you are a "Liberal" or "Progressive" man, you must know that you are much better then the authors of aforementioned articles call you. You are not trash -- you are Human. You are a good man. You deserve better! You do not have any moral debt to misandrists. If you believe that Feminism stands for Gender Equality, then your role as a Feminist Man is to focus on Inequality which affects men. You should watch videos by Dr. Christina Hoff Sommers -- a true Feminist who stands for Gender Equality. Indeed, Dr. Christina Hoff Sommers fits much better into the Dictionary Definition of feminist then something that spews hatred for men on the pages of WP or NYT. If you are a good man, you can advocate for male victims of Domestic Violence.
If you are a "Liberal" or "Progressive" man for issues related to Economy, then we agree on these issues 90%. You can be one of the first people in the Egalitarian Left. You will get a little flack from Conservatives, but they are never as vicious as "Liberal" or "Progressive" HyperReactionaries. Liberals and Conservatives can be good people who Agree to Disagree. Reactionaries and especially HyperReactionaries are intolerant.