In Dire Need of Sex

The late, great Robbin Williams starred as disc jockey Adrian Cronauer in "Good Morning Vietnam!" Very loosely based on a true story, Cronauer was a soldier who worked for Armed Forces Radio. Cronauer was a bit wild in his radio programming, (he played that crazy rock'n'roll!) Williams played the part as a real provocateur. Spoiler: Cronauer wrote the film, and fashioned his character as more provocative and unorthodox than he actually was. Robin Williams made it his own.

In the film, Cronauer was constantly running into roadblocks and personality conflicts from folks who wanted to censor his radio programming, DJ patter, and the news that he delivered over the air. Finally, his humorless, by-the-book commanding officer berated him mercilessly and then fired him.

As Williams left the office, he turned to the CO and said, "You are in more dire need of a blowjob than any white man in history."

I watched both the Republican and Democratic Conventions. The difference between the two was striking. I've never seen so much rage under one roof for such a long period of time as I did watching the RNC. In contrast, the DNC was full of all that "hopey-changey" stuff that progressives love and modern conservatives seem to hate. The Democrats' speakers stuck with the message of "moving forward" set to a DJ'ed dance party.

OK, OK, they did toss out the "when they go low, we go high" maxim as Michelle Obama herself claimed that Trump was going “small” and that “it’s unhealthy, and quite frankly, it’s unpresidential.” Former President Obama even mocked Trump's crowd size while moving his hands in a shrinking size gesture. The fact that his gesture seemed to represent the size of something else was lost on no one. If there is one thing that gets under Trump's skin, it's questioning his manhood.

Sometimes, it seemed like a Comedy Central roast - punctuated with audience laughter and applause. At the RNC, Republicans preferred humorless, raw insults led by the anointed Saint Donald. (Anointed? Rev. Franklin Graham on the assassination attempt: "God spared president Trump.") Trump railed against every perceived slight, whined about the (2020) "Stolen Election," and fretted that the dastardly Democrats plan to steal his rightful throne again.

In a recent piece, I suggested that alpha male masculinity is the one, constant underlying trait that defines the modern GOP - represented by that sort of John Wayne one-dimensional macho shoot-first-ask-questions-later persona character that he often played. Beyond the masculinity obsession in the GOP, in that piece, I noted the rise of women in business, sports, and overall culture. Women also now lead in the number of college degrees earned.

In my very last piece, I mentioned how outstanding the women performed in the Olympics... they needed a wheelbarrow to carry all of their medals home.

Who are these athletic, highly educated, successful, confident, independent women dating? MAGA men are discovering that it's not them. A flexed muscle, a dually truck with loud pipes, and a great pickup line just don't seem to impress the ladies like they used to. "Hey babe, if I said you had a beautiful body, would you hold it against me?" <wink> Uh, no, she won't. And you'll be lucky not to need a surgeon to remove the pieces of beer bottle embedded in your skull.

In a survey done this year by the American Enterprise Institute, (a right-leaning think tank,) three-quarters of young college-educated women say they would be less inclined to date a Trump supporter. Over half of all young women wouldn't bother with a Republican.

One prominent factor that has filtered out MAGA hatted males in the dating world, is the use of dating apps and other online date search services. Why? Because most of these dating apps have actual filters for political affiliation. Just as you can select a preference for religion, education, height, weight, and lifestyle, you can screen out potential partners who prefer to wear MAGA hats. And today's young women often do just that.

According to Social Science Research Solutions, between 30% and 43% (depending on age cohort) have used dating apps. Compare how many men vs. women use these sites. 56% of men are chasing 39% of women. The odds are against online males even before they select a political affiliation.

It appears that MAGA enthusiasts are being forced into the shallow end of the dating pool. From there it's an easy conclusion that these young fellows, well, to put it mildly, "they ain't gettin' any." Put in less crude terms, A whole bunch of men in the prime of their dating/mating lives are summarily rejected by women, sight unseen. This is not only bad news for their young and boiling libidos, but these males are becoming isolated from female companionship, intimacy, friendship, and ultimately... love.

It's a doom loop of sorts. They can't connect with members of the opposite sex (if that is their preference) due to their political views, social awkwardness, and/or lack of education. Their disinterest in education and social interaction leads to the loss of earning power and limits job (and dating) prospects. In frustration, they retreat into their proverbial basements or join the adult equivalent of a gang - a reactionary political party, or worse. (Militias, white pride groups like the Proud Boys, etc.) This makes them even LESS attractive to potential partners, so they become more enraged and more disconnected from traditional culture/social norms. They become more radical in their political viewpoints. Rage/Rinse/Repeat.

They call themselves "incels." That is a portmanteau of "involuntarily celibate." ("Portmaniteau" - I thought that was a seaside town in Canada?) No less than the Anti-Defamation League, the group that seeks to address hate and extremism, defines incels as “heterosexual men who blame women and society for their lack of romantic success.” The word was first used by a gay female blogger who wanted to share her self-examination of being celibate. It was picked up in online circles as a pejorative for creepy, hostile, (and undesirable) males. And then a weird thing happened (imagine that!) To own it, this angry, sexless male subculture adopted the label for themselves.

Their lives are one big paradox. Their whole chosen identity is based on the absence of a romantic or sexual partner, they are unable to even relate to women. They are proud of their label, but studies have shown that self-identifying incels have staggering rates of depression. Incels desperately want to fit in, but they isolate themselves in their warped community - much of it online - and have developed their own language, full of code words for outsiders. They share a sense of victimhood and are mired in self-pity, yet they believe that their genetic physical strength gives them superiority over women. Their pride at being "incels" is certainly an act of self-sabotage in their search for female companionship. BTW, they resent members of the tribe that do find a partner... because, traitors to the cause?

These various incel groups are collectively referred to as the "manosphere." Zack Beauchamp of Vox describes this greater tribe as the “neo-patriarchy. They believe above all else, that men are entitled to dominate women. Their rhetoric often veers to discussion of rape, sexual assault, and even murder when they don't get what they want. Unsurprisingly, their extreme rhetoric can turn into reality, especially for the gullible, the mentally/emotionally unstable, and those already prone to violence.

Trump is their dominant silverback, the ranking alpha male to the rest of the other alphas. He is the leader and example to them all. His misogyny is on record and is constantly reinforced by how he refers to women. Hillary Clinton - "such a nasty woman." Stormy Daniels (his porn star/prostitute) "horseface." Nancy Pelosi -"crazy as a bedbug." On V.P. Kamala Harris "She's so bad. She's so pathetic. She's so fu*king bad." And of course his infamous, "...and when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything ... Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything." Lest I forget, he lost a multi-million dollar lawsuit brought forth by E Jean Carroll which found him guilty of sexual abuse.

His Vice President select, Hillbilly J.D. Vance put the exclamation point on the misogynistic MAGAt campaign by claiming that the US was being led by a “bunch of childless cat ladies." Vance has made it clear that he favors doing away with no-fault divorce laws. He agreed with a podcaster who suggested that the“whole purpose of the postmenopausal female”, is to "help take care of her grandchildren." I'll let you guess his views on abortion.

Again, more paradox. Two married men, (one with a history of philandering,) who sound a constant drumbeat of misogyny. Like all things Republican, 'do as I say, not as I do.' It's like educated rich guys telling the academically challenged poor guys that the educated rich guys are the problem. Incels and many of the MAGA tribe believe that feminism and women's emancipation have elevated women to the determinant sex, as far as sex goes. And that the determinant sex prefers good-looking rich guys to creepers as their sexual partners. (Pretty good guess, Sherlock!)

The GOP is happy to play to the incel demographic. When JD Vance made his "childless cat ladies" who are "miserable at their own lives" comment to Tucker Carlson, he mentioned V.P. Harris by name. When Harris announced the affable Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as her running mate, the Democrats at the DNC blew the roof off the place with cheering. The GOP immediately went after Walz's man card. The Swift Boaters pounced on his 24-year career with the National Guard. It was knives-out when they found that his retirement came just a few months short of his unit's deployment to Afghanistan. (He'd retired with an honorable discharge to run for Congress.) There were discrepancies with how he represented his rank (which was reduced for the sake of retirement benefits,) and how/where he carried a service weapon.

Hundreds of vets and military family members signed a letter for the Harris campaign in support of Walz's service. They noted that JD Vance’s attack on Walz isn't surprising considering that Trump expressed disdain for those who have served. During his 4 year Marine career, JD Vance did not see combat either. He spent 6 months in Iraq, but the rat-tat-tat-tat he heard emanated from his keyboard as he wrote stories for military publication. Vance's indignation and righteous anger don't seem to apply to Trump, who as everyone knows, took several deferments to get out of service in Vietnam and finally paid a Dr. to sign off on a "bone spurs" medical exemption. Trump once said that avoiding STDs in his dating life in the '80s was his “personal Vietnam." He's all honorable and manly like that.

 In my social media feed, I'm seeing more and more of that. Who are the "Real Men?" Certainly not Walz who retired honorably after over 20 years in the Guard, a teaching/coaching career, serving in Congress, and as a popular governor. And how can Harris, A WOMAN, be the masculine leader that we need??? Who passes the testosterone test?

Years ago, I read George Lakoff's "Don't Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate." (It has become a real bible for me in understanding political behavior... read it.) The main premise of his book concerns the foundational differences between conservatives and progressives. Humans see family structure differently, we utilize two competing parenting styles. The Guardian has a good summary:

"... the US society can be explained through two competing parental/governmental models ... <It is in the> concepts of the "strict father" vs. the "nurturant parent." He argued that conservatives cherish the idea of the "strict father," who believes evil and danger are omnipresent and that he must protect his children by acting as he sees fit. He is not afraid to punish them when they do wrong but is keen to keep them on the path of righteousness, at least until they grow up, when they accept the consequences of their actions.
Liberals, on the other hand, cling to the model of the nurturant parent, a caring, sharing and empathetic figure who believes children develop by contributing to the community - hence they support taxation and civil rights."

Lakoff assures us that we are in different places along that scale, it is not a binary choice or trait. But on the toxic side of the "strict father" scale, we find males who are ultra-alpha dominant dads/partners. Members of the He-Man Woman Hater's Club. And of course, the incels. A manosphere that wants to roll back the "feminazi" revolution. What if all those silverbacks in dire need actually got some good lovin'?

I have a social media friend that I met as a parent when our kids were the same age and participated in the same extracurriculars. He is an attorney, and like me, a short, squatty curmudgeon. His social media feed showed him to be a sort of a pseudo-intellectual right-winger, (I've followed him since the "W" years.) He loved to write mini-essays on war and battle history, honored the anniversary of the sinking of Revolutionary warships, and filled up column inches on the virtues of Napolean, Patton, and Robert E. Lee. He talked about which gun he was cleaning and how it had performed at the shooting range. He was firmly behind Bush's wars in the Middle East. But he didn't talk much about his wife or personal life. I met her at a social event, and she didn't seem very warm... maybe slightly shrewish? As the Tea Party formed and Fox News started down the wing-nut road of no return, he morphed slowly with the MAGA movement. His essays became more strident, and his online friends egged him even further right and showered him with compliments over his genius. It was interesting to watch an attorney twist himself into knots over his defense of where the Republican Party was going. I could tell he wasn't totally comfortable with Trump, but like so many, he wasn't going to let the country be turned over to "soshalist Dumbocrats," hell-bent on destroying the country. Blah-blah blah.

One day, he quietly announced that he'd gotten a divorce. There was not a lot of detail that he shared, just like there had never been any previous detail before (save for the usual "I got a good kid" posts.)

And then, a miracle. After a time, he posted a couple of mentions of going with some friends to dinner and Margaritas. Sometimes he referred to having a "date" accompany him. In a while, he began to post pics of himself and this lovely woman as they dined out. He posted selfies as they drank, traveled, and attended concerts together. He even bragged about going to the theater with her (?!?!) They married. The photos have continued. In addition to outings, every birthday and special occasion is photographed and remarked upon. Those remarks have not stopped gushing about his delightful wife, how happy they are, how much he loves being around her. Judging by the photos and some poking around social media, she is as happy as he is. Always smiling, laughing, and toasting the good life.

And his political posts have fallen by about 75% maybe more. He hasn't posted support of Bernie Sanders yet, but his argumentative style and contentious debates have softened, drastically. His online friends most interested in sharing political vitriol have dropped off of his feed.

I'm not sayin' that his change of heart is due to... you know... getting the thing that Adrian Cronauer (Robin Williams) suggested. Correlation isn't always causation, you know. On the other hand, maybe it IS true that these guys are in more need of <oral sex> than any white men in history.

And ladies, I'm NOT, repeat, NOT asking you to save America. Not like this, anyway. It's just too much of an ask.

Let us remember the words of JFK (not RFK!) during his inaugural address, where he said to America:

"And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country. Except that whole providing sexual favors for incels, that's crazy. That's insane. Nobody wants you to do that." -John Fitzgerald Kennedy