Conor Fitzgerald is now one of the most underrated observers of the scene today, and I highly recommend his essays at The Fitzstack. My favorite from August is when he returns to one of his favorite subjects, which is the attempt by progressives to deal with, portray, or embody an idea of nontoxic masculinity.
Naturally, he begins by talking about Scott Galloway, the liberal masculinity guru. But because Galloway is progressive, he cannot really cope with men except to see them as objects needing care from a technocracy that comprehends their hurts, wounds, and the unfairness they confront. Conor writes:
In talking about how he came to the conclusion that men needed help, Galloway mentions something that you often hear from Richard Reeves, which is that he engaged with the Democratic party and found that men were the one group who were not taken seriously as a special interest, and in fact that there was active resistance toward doing so. Reeves talks about his version of this here. So Galloway mentions going to the Democratic convention and hearing people talk about every slice of society as worthy of uplift and attention except men, who must be excluded because of their historic privilege and because of Patriarchy. It’s self-evident to him that the thing to do is to slot men into the progressive moral system in the same way as other groups. He doesn’t ask what happens when someone’s worldview is not not primarily based around wanting help or liking it — the idea of such a thing is nonsensical, or sinister. As a party man, his belief is never that a progressive outlook doesn’t suit men, and that it would need to change or change focus to better accommodate them. In the podcast he steers around and cannot confront the question of whether there is something that is psychologically deleterious to men to be thought of as a problematic, passive mass to be fixed or held up by a system.
In the course of the essay, Conor writes about the streaming hit Ted Lasso. Although it began as a show ostensibly about a man’s world: professional football (soccer) in the U.K., its portrayal of masculinity fits squarely in the progressive worldview. Relatedly, it’s a show watched more by women than men, a fact that has clearly made an impression on the writers as they’ve steered the show to have Ted helping a women’s team now.
Back to another sharp observation about Galloway:
Galloway keeps highlighting the biological inadequacies of men, in a way he never would with another group, and I can’t help but feel he does it with a degree of relief. So during the podcast we’re reminded that boys are less mature, have brains that develop more slowly, and are “less educationally fit” than girls. When I note he would never point out these kinds of basic biological limitations with women, it’s not a complaint — it’s just that it’s interesting and revealing. To be able to articulate men’s inadequacies comes as a relief because they allow a Progressive activist to position men as a victim class, but still one of inferior quality. Men can then be deserving of help but not in a way that is disruptive of the philosophical status quo, in which a member of an oppressor class being capable makes them dangerous.
Another nail-on-head moment. Read the whole thing here.