Memo to Dems: Don't blame sexism

Or it will be longer than four years in the political wilderness

There’s lots of discussion about gender and the election. I’ve added my thoughts in a few spots, including:

• ‘A fatal miscalculation’: masculinity researcher Richard Reeves on why Democrats lost young men - The Guardian.

• What Just Happened With Trump and Men? A postmortem with masculinity expert Richard Reeves - The Washingtonian.

• The Male Vote: The Dems' “Fatal Miscalculation” and What Trump Got Right - PBS Amanpour & Co.

I also wrote an oped in the Boston Globe, under the headline “Boosting men doesn’t come at women’s expense” which with their permission I’m sharing here too. As always, let me know what you think!

If the Democrats conclude that sexism propelled Donald Trump to victory, their spell in the political wilderness will last a lot longer than four years.

In the immediate aftermath of the election, many progressive commentators have been suggesting that many men were simply not willing to vote for a woman, and especially not for a Black woman.

But if progressives dismiss whole swaths of the electorate as misogynists, they will send even more men running toward the political right. Instead, they need to show they can take men’s concerns seriously without backing down from fights on behalf of women.

It is true that overall, Kamala Harris won among women and Trump won among men, according to exit polls. But the gender gap was, if anything, a little smaller than in 2020, because women moved toward the Republicans even more decisively than men did.

The largest swings were among young voters and Hispanic voters. There was a huge move to the right among men under 30 and among Hispanic men, with both groups supporting Trump. But Kamala Harris also underperformed badly among women under 30 and among Hispanic women, facts that are hard to square with the idea that sexism was a major factor.

Sexism is too easy a story for the Democrats to tell themselves, blaming voters rather than confronting their own failure.

There is no strong evidence that young men are turning against gender equality. But they have turned away from the left because the left has turned away from them. The problems of young men are not the confections of reactionaries. This is a story of elite neglect, not voter chauvinism.

Suicide rates among men under 30 have risen by 40 percent since 2010 and are four times higher than among young women. Male suicide accounts for as many deaths as breast cancer. Men are less likely than women to go to college or buy a home. They are more likely to be lonely and are more vulnerable to addiction. Young white men from lower-income homes are worse off than their fathers on almost every economic and social indicator. There is a bigger gender gap on campuses today than in 1972 — when the government passed Title IX to prevent sex-based discrimination in education — but today the disparities in college enrollment and performance are the other way around.

The Democrats have failed to address these issues. Under the Biden administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has refused to acknowledge the gender disparity in suicide rates. The White House gender policy council has not tackled a single issue facing primarily boys and men. There have been initiatives to promote women in STEM and construction but nothing about encouraging men into teaching or mental health. There are women’s health research initiatives but no Office on Men’s Health.

During the campaign, the Democrats published an economic agenda festooned with images of voters — none of them a man. Harris declined an appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast, even though (or perhaps because) his audience skews 80 percent male. By contrast, Trump, Vance, and Musk all appeared there in the closing days — with Trump’s appearance racking up 45 million views, close to a third of the votes cast. Rogan ended up endorsing Trump.

The Democrats and progressive institutions have a massive blind spot when it comes to male issues, and this was exposed in the election. At worst, men are seen not as having problems but as being the problem.

The language of “toxic masculinity,” “patriarchy,” and “mansplaining” from the political left has not been greatly appealing to men who are struggling to find their feet in the economy. Perhaps this should not be a huge surprise. As Reshma Saujani, founder of Girls Who Code, writes, “No one wants to be a part of a movement that ignores or even denigrates them.”

For too long, the gender debate has been trapped in a zero-sum frame. Policy makers have overlooked the challenges that are increasingly affecting boys and men, seeing them as somehow in conflict with their efforts on behalf of girls and women. In the real world the opposite is true. Helping boys and men to acquire more skills, to remain healthy, and to progress in the workplace is great for the women and girls in their lives.

More investments in vocational training, for example in apprenticeships and technical high schools, would mostly help boys and men to secure better jobs. That would mean men contributing more to the family. Reducing rates of addiction among men through male-targeted programs would reduce the caretaking burden on women. Paid leave for dads would help equalize the responsibilities of parenthood, helping women advance in the labor market.

The Democrats’ postmortem should result in an entirely new approach to boys and men and the issues they care about. Republicans have something to learn here, too. Men just delivered for them, so now they have to deliver for men.

Voters are capable of holding two thoughts in their head at once: that there is much more work to do for women and girls, and that we must also pay more attention to the challenges facing boys and men. In the end, we rise together.