Categories
entitled babies gender policing homophobia masculinity men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny transphobia

The right-wing attacks on GQ’s “New Masculinity” really put the “his” in histrionic

By David Futrelle

Right-wingers really don’t like the idea of Pharrell Willians in a dress, huh?

Earlier this week, GQ magazine unveiled a special issue devoted to what it called the “new masculinity.” On the cover: pop music artiste Pharrell, wearing a gown, I guess, that looked vaguely like a sleeping bag for an octopus. Inside the magazine, Pharrell models an assortment of barely less-dramatic gender-bendy outfits and offers his thoughts on new models or masculinity in a long and rambling interview.

Naturally, the defenders of traditional masculinity were shocked and stunned. On Twitter, right-wing ideologues like Mike Cernovich and Paul Joseph Watson sniffed their disapproval. “The New Masculinity looks pretty gay,” former Gamergate grifter Ethan Ralph opined.

You’d think that Mr. Ralph would be more open to a challenge to old-fashioned toxic masculinity, given that one of the former editors for his website literally stabbed his father to death in a rage (allegedly) in the midst of an argument over online conspiracy theories.

Other commenters on Twitter were a bit blunter:

Meanwhile, assorted right-wing rags offered more extended, er, critiques of the issue. The American Conservative declared that GQ had “emasculate[d]” itself by rounding up, and listening to, an assortment of writers, activists, comedians and others who weren’t all straight white men. (The horror!)

Spectator USA denounced what it saw as

a bunch of pouting narcissists in ugly €1,000 jackets talking down to men who struggle to improve themselves and build and sustain their families is disgusting. Frankly, they can roll their issue up and perch atop it.

But perhaps the most panicked reaction of the bunch came from Brandon Morse of RedState.com, clearly upset that GQ was, as per his headline, “Overtly Celebrat[ing] the Feminization of Men.”

Really putting the “his” in “histrionic,” Morse began his piece by announcing that “[o]ne of the largest projects being undertaken by the regressive left is the elimination of men.”

Morse devoted much of his article to a defense of “true masculinity” against the evil spectacle of men wearing dresses or “just ditching being a man altogether to embrace transgenderism.” The centerpiece of his argument? Wolves.

[I]t’s not femininity that’s been keeping the literal and proverbial wolves in the hills for thousands of years. When evil begins carrying out its purposes, it’s not people like Pharrell showing up in dresses that put it down. It’s not the “new masculinity” that’s going to charge into battle to protect those it loves at the risk of its own life.

Huh. I hate to break it to Morse, but there aren’t a lot of manly dudes out there wrestling literal wolves to protect the ladyfolk. Indeed, as our old friend Wikipedia notes,

There are few historical records or modern cases of wolf attacks in North America. In the half-century up to 2002, there were eight fatal attacks in Europe and Russia, three in North America, and more than 200 in south Asia

And back here in reality the “proverbial wolves” that “true masculine” men are supposedly so nobly protecting women from are overwhelmingly … other “true masculine” men.

In many case there is no protection to be found. Roughly a third of all women worldwide have been the victims of sexual violence. 50,000 women are murdered worldwide by their intimate partners or family members – that is, in the overwhelming majority of cases, by the very men who are supposedly protecting them from “wolves.” (Both of these stats are from the United Nations.)

That’s a big part of why we’re talking about developing a new model of masculinity in the first place.

While the right-wing attacks on GQ’s “new masculinity” are both hysterical and incoherent, Pharrell may not exactly be the ideal poster boy for this particular cause. Sure, he makes a fine model for the various outfits the folks at GQ handed him. But his thoughts on the subject of masculinity – while well-intentioned — are a mixture of trite cliché and baffling new-age babble. Over the course of this gas giant of an interview, Pharell serves up thousands of words of free-associational babble that only occasionally comes to the point.

I think the truest definition of masculinity is the essence of you that understands and respects that which isn’t masculine. If you ask me, when we talk about masculinity, it’s also very racial, this conversation. Because the dominant force on this planet right now is the older straight white male. And there’s a particular portion of them that senses a tanning effect. They sense a feminizing effect. They sense a nonbinary effect when it comes to gender.

Other time he seems to be prothletizing for the Church of Our Lady of the Bleeding Obvious:

You know, America was “created by our Founding Fathers”—not our Founding Mothers or our Founding Mother and Father. Right?

In one telling passage, he tries to empathize with trans folks, but in the end brings the converstation back around to himself:

Because think about it. What is happening to a transgender person? What are they going through? They feel like their body is not connected to their spirit. And what kind of toxic environment do we live in that they have to justify how they feel? That must feel incredibly insane. That is spiritual warfare. So I wanted to be in the conversation.

Well, sure, dude. Be in the conversation. But maybe not the center of it? There are a lot of other people out there with far more interesting things to say than the guy who’s only just getting around to apologizing for “Blurred Lines.”

Pharrell could perhaps learn a thing or two from some of the diverse assortment of other voices featured elsewhere in the magazine – especially lesbian comedian Hannah Gadsby, who had a few pointed suggestions for the men in the room.

“Hello, the men,” she began.

Here’s a thought experiment: What if you, the men, looked to traditional feminine traits and tried incorporating them into your masculinity?

Women are always being encouraged to stir masculine traits into their feminine recipe. We are told to “be bolder!” “Speak up in meetings.” “Exaggerate your skills.” All that Lean In sort of crap. So perhaps it’s time for you, the men, to be more ladylike. How about you scale back on your confidence? How about you try not to act in every situation? What if you tried to refrain from sharing your opinions or co-opting other people’s ideas?

Sometimes the best way for a man to contribute to a discussion is to shut up and just listen for a while. Or, in the case of the folks at RedState and The American Conservative and the rest of the right-wing critics, to shut their traps forever.

Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.

We Hunted the Mammoth relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

65 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Moggie
Moggie
10 months ago

I could be a superhero if some of the nouns were different.

Full_Metal_Ox
10 months ago

I think Pharell looks like some sort of Wakandan monastic hermit, sensibly attired in insulated high-tech synthetics for his snowy mountain retreat.

Cat Mara
Cat Mara
10 months ago

Re: licking cats, accidentally or otherwise, some people have actually made these weird rubber tongue contraptions that you can hold between your teeth so you can “groom” your cat. The cats’ reaction in most of the videos I’ve seen of them have been along the lines of “HUMAN WHAT YOU DOING HUMAN STAHP” 😂

Naglfar
Naglfar
10 months ago

@Cat Mara
I’ve seen those. It just seems like a very inefficient way to groom an animal that does a pretty good job of grooming itself.

Big Titty Demon
Big Titty Demon
10 months ago

@Cat Mara, Naglfar

I’ve seen those too, I just… don’t see the point. Use a brush. Gets the loose underfur way better and they’re more used to it from petting. And you won’t get a crick in your neck.

Moggie
Moggie
10 months ago

Also, with a brush your delicate face is further away from the cat’s pointy ends, if they decide they’ve had enough.

Viscaria
Viscaria
10 months ago

Consider:

The farmers’ market sells fresh produce from independent farms in the surrounding area.

Sounds good, right? But consider the simple substitution of a single noun:

The farmers’ market sells fresh plague from independent farms in the surrounding area.

Wow! Not so good now, huh? Really makes u think.

Naglfar
Naglfar
10 months ago

To add to what Viscaria said:comment image

The new bug-zapper kills all mosquitoes in your home.

Vs.

The new bug-zapper kills all people in your home.

Or

Cleaning has never been easier with the new Roomba model.

Vs.

Genocide has never been easier with the new Roomba model.

Hambeast
Hambeast
10 months ago

Right-wingers remind me of fear-aggressive dogs. They react with over the top aggression to the unfamiliar because they’re terrified of it.

Like fear-aggressive dogs, right-wingers can and do become habituated to the new, but most of them fight it with everything they have.

Unlike fear-aggressive dogs, right-wingers are humans and should be able to rationally reason their way out of the fear. Instead, (and unlike dogs) they work very hard at getting other humans who aren’t terrified to be terrified like they are.

Either way, it must be an awful way to live.

Joan Pasley
Joan Pasley
10 months ago

We saw this same nonsense with that Gillette razor ad. These rwnj’s are all alike. They’ll go online, and find anything to whine about. I am so sick of these corporate justice warriors.

Yutolia the Laissez-Fairy Pronoun Boner
Yutolia the Laissez-Fairy Pronoun Boner
10 months ago

I keep laughing at the cover image – it looks like Pharrell is some kind of spirit entity coming to haunt MRAs.

Bring on the female ghostbusters!

WMDKitty
WMDKitty
10 months ago

I just have one question.

Does that thing come in purple?

cubist
10 months ago

I always say that there are two types of people in the world: the kind that would totally bone David Bowie if they had the opportunity, and liars.

What about those whose sexual preference is “none of the above”?

Hypatia's Daughter
Hypatia's Daughter
10 months ago

Prith kDar

I thought “real men” weren’t supposed to be concerned with fashion, let alone require fainting couches to cope with it. If only they didn’t shun pearls, they could clutch them.

It is amazing how conservative social, religious and political movements that consider gender a rigid, immutable, natural reality (like granite being hard and water being composed of 2 atoms of hydrogen & 1 atom of oxygen) are always so terrified that people will step outside of their gender boundaries, that they punish people in the most brutal ways possible when they do.
Almost like gender norms are more social constructs than biological imperatives.

Redsilkphoenix: Jetpack Vixen, Intergalactic Meanie
Redsilkphoenix: Jetpack Vixen, Intergalactic Meanie
10 months ago

My first thought upon looking at that outfit was that the designer was channeling the old (very old) comic strip The Yellow Kid. Then again, most people haven’t read up on the origins of comic art either, so I may be one of the few to think that as a possible inspiration.