OPINION: Andrew Tate sparks a culture war: The perspective of a young man and woman The New Political – The New Political

This story contains two parts, each written by Zach Donaldson and Julianna Rittenberg, sophomores studying political science. Donaldson serves as the assistant opinion editor and Rittenberg is an opinion writer for The New Political.

Please note that these views and opinions do not reflect those of The New Political.

Zach:

Whether you love or hate him, laugh at or laugh with him, vilify or deify him, one thing is for certain: it is nearly impossible to avoid him. More searched on Google than Joe Biden in the past month and amassing 12.7 million views on a platform he holds no account on, Andrew Tate has risen from relative obscurity to one of the internets most notorious provocateurs. How exactly? By acting as the speakerphone for a large group of depraved and angry young men riddled with insecurity.

Masking his brand under the tired trope of defending manhood and the traditional household, Tate promotes an ideology that, at best, commodifies, objectifies and infantilizes young women. At worst, it downright encourages violence and victim-shaming. He has compared women to dogs that must obey him. He has noted a preference for dating 18 and 19-year-old girls so he can make an imprint on them. He has stated that he would attack a woman who accuses him of cheating. He has argued that rape victims shoulder responsibility in being raped.

It would be easy to go on for pages. To give air-time to his ludicrous venom and waste breath tearing apart every one of his nonsensical sputterings, but that has been done by countless others and doesnt do any service to this issue. I could yell at the sky and ask how a man who is mired in allegations of beating and trafficking women is lauded as a badass and hero by many young men in my generation, but that wouldnt put a dent in his popularity. I could demand the array of social media sites banning his content be expanded in vigor and breadth, but that would only slap a band-aid on a bleeding bullet-hole.

The reality is that Andrew Tate is far bigger than one misogynist with a big microphone. He is the nastiest new emblem of the old guard in Americas ongoing culture war on gender roles, a conflict steeped in who gets to define masculinity and how it is defined. Its a battle with a lot at stake. In order to create a space where men and women can be authentically themselves, we must understand why Tate and other alpha male figures' words have appeal, how they perpetrate a harmful environment and encourage more men to hold them accountable.

Tate and his peers are the culture war response to an increasing consciousness on the fluidity and privilege of gender and gender roles. A far cry from the traditional household model of decades gone by, there are more serious efforts today in pursuing equal opportunity for women, challenging long-held microaggressions in daily conversation and an emphasis that male doesnt need to mean masculine, and female doesnt need to mean feminine. This can be seen in the smallest challenges to the status quo, which yield the loudest of results, whether it is Harry Styles wearing a dress for Vogue or Ariana Grande proudly declaring that God is a woman.

Tearing down the patriarchy is beneficial for everyone. By breaking the long-held stigma that men dont cry, we give a opportunity to young men, who are disproportionately impacted by suicide and mental health, to finally open up and seek treatment. By tackling simple phrases like you play like a girl, we can validate young women to continue being competitive, hard-charging and high achieving. By ditching gendered expressions and attacking institutional oppression all together, we can create a space where the question of gender is irrelevant to any professional opportunity or acceptance into a community.

But the fact is, we have been socialized and raised for generations to think within the gender binary and within the age-old phrases assigned to it. I have no doubt that our grandparents and parents telling us to man up or act like a lady were meant with the most sincerity, but words have a meaning and a message that we internalize. Change scares people, and when you challenge notions as basic as peoples understanding of gender, it elicits a response.

This nexus of confusion and anger is where people like Tate thrive, clinging to a dying social perception that still resonates with many to pump their agenda and fill their pockets. It has a political functionality to it and, as Julianna Rittenberg will point out, that can be manipulated to perpetuate an environment that is scary for women to live in. I cant testify to that struggle personally, but I can unfortunately see why some of my peers may fall victim to the propaganda of this old guard.

For one, Ive heard constant comments from young men my age who feel attacked when they hear the term toxic masculinity. Having a powerful celebrity celebrate the concept is both amusing and disturbingly empowering to them. It breeds a willful ignorance, and reproduces the harassment and harm women have faced for centuries in a new sphere.

I also know a lot of men and women across generational and racial barriers who are annoyed as society updates what terminology is acceptable when discussing gender. So when former President Donald Trump assured them that political correctness needs to be an idea of the past, they came out to vote in droves. Naturally, when you give a man who flaunts sexually assaulting women the mandate to lead a country, cultural degradation will follow.

There are countless more examples, whether its infuriation at things as trivial as how sexy an M&M is or bringing this rage to some of the youngest among us in scouting. They all speak to one incontrovertible fact: gender, and our conception of it, is central to the way we live our lives. If we ever hope to reach a place where men and women can be authentically and comfortably themselves, we must continue to call out the demagoguery of powerful figures, whether it is an aggrieved kickboxer or the president of the United States.

Julianna:

In July, U.S. Senate Ohio candidate JD Vance tweeted he believes women should stay in violent marriages, rather than divorce under the guise that it is better for kids. Domestic violence is not a gendered issue specifically, anyone can be in a violent relationship. However, Vances statement specifically refers to women in violent marriages. Rather than viewing partner violence as a safety issue, Vance insinuates it is an issue of male anger and male expression of emotions. This perpetuates the idea that allowing hostile partners to express emotions in an unhealthy way tops safety or bodily autonomy.

There are things that women subconsciously know, especially the expectations in every aspect of life for how to behave, dress and speak. If you wear crop tops or shorts or skirts, its your fault when someone makes you feel uncomfortable. Its your fault when someone makes your confidence a liability. When women wear clothes that give them confidence, that confidence is torn down by men making the moment and the clothes about themselves, their sex drive and their wants.

Women are subconsciously taught to avoid confrontation, otherwise, they are too overbearing and intimidating. We learn that it is better to avoid bringing up issues that might make someone angry and potentially violent, than it is to speak up for our needs. We see on social media that women are blamed for school shootings, rape and domestic violence, instead of the truth, that the perpetrator is at fault.

Most women have heard a man in their life, whom they respect, make a misogynistic joke. Theres an expectation to laugh or else you are labeled bitch. In my experiences, I have been put on the spot to explain why the joke was not funny and then told to lighten up, get over it or else no one would want to be around me. Women are put on the spot to explain what made them uncomfortable, criticized for it and then usually ignored.

Women face misogyny in schools, as well. Most women have experienced being interrupted in classes or talked over in conversations with our peers. If we do well in classes, rumors start that we must be sleeping with the teacher. I have had people tell me political science is not a male-dominated field, because there are more women than men at the collegiate level. Yet, when looking at the breakdown of jobs, more men are in political science and government jobs than women.

Even in the way the word feminism has been turned to have a negative connotation. We are told that feminism is only for angry women, but then we are told that feminism is a girlboss concept. We are told to be quieter with our anger, while men are free to express their anger. Men even get to attempt to overturn elections with their anger, yet when we push back against unfair wages, sexist dress codes or feeling unsafe in the workplace or school, our anger is unheard.

We need to do better. I refuse to be pushed into a box and I refuse to be apologetic for something that I am proud of. Children cannot grow up thinking that sexist and misogynistic behavior is acceptable by any means. All people, regardless of sex or gender, must push back against misogyny. All of us must call out this behavior and refuse to give it a platform.

Originally posted here:

OPINION: Andrew Tate sparks a culture war: The perspective of a young man and woman The New Political - The New Political