179
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 May 2026
179 points (100.0% liked)
politics
29791 readers
2454 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
There are many women in the American right. However, Democrats would be smart to not just cater to women but to men.
You've fallen for the false dichotomy that you have to pick men or women like their interests are inherently at odds and human rights is a zero sum game.
From https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/democrats-ponder-manosphere-rcna209806
Democrats know they have a problem with men, particularly the young men who have drifted away from them in recent years. But six months after the gender gap contributed to the party’s disappointing showing in last year’s election, top Democrats are still throwing spaghetti at the wall, lacking a unified theory on how to win these voters back.
TBF that seems to be their MO in general.
Only way appeal broadly to both is to not favor subjugating one to the other, but support people in the relationships they want to have.
Not just relationships but the problems each gender faces. Democrats have been too focused on the problems women face probably because they foolishly believed that since there are more women than men, this would enable them to win.
This is utter nonsense. What they have not done is pander to the desire to oppress
From https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/democrats-ponder-manosphere-rcna209806
At the center of all of this is an acknowledgement that public opinion on the Democratic Party has dipped to an all-time low, men are souring on the party especially quickly, and losing ground with about half the voting population isn’t a recipe for success. It’s weighing heavily on the minds of Democrats while making Republicans giddy: On Friday, President Donald Trump needled Democrats for wanting to “spend money to learn how to talk” to men.
Jeff Horwitt, a Democratic pollster with Hart Research Associates (who conducts the NBC News poll with a Republican counterpart), told NBC News that a look at recent presidential exit poll results shows that “when Democrats do well broadly with men, they are competitive. When Democrats are not competitive with men, Democrats lose.” And while Horwitt doesn’t believe Republicans “have a lock on young men,” the GOP spoke to their economic anxiety in 2024 in a way that loomed large in 2024.
I'm not really seeing where the Democratic Party is doing anything to cater to women over men.
Can I find examples of extremely loud activists that are terminally online and that might be saying what I consider rather dumb and unhelpful and counterproductive? Of course. That doesn't mean that is the direction the party is taking.
From https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/democrats-ponder-manosphere-rcna209806
Democrats know they have a problem with men, particularly the young men who have drifted away from them in recent years. But six months after the gender gap contributed to the party’s disappointing showing in last year’s election, top Democrats are still throwing spaghetti at the wall, lacking a unified theory on how to win these voters back.
Again, I'm not sure where I see Democrat politicians kicking men. Do you have examples of actual policies that Democratic politicians vote for, or don't vote for, that are ostracizing men?
Do I see plenty of liberal activists doing what I think is performative and ridiculous bullshit practically designed - maybe even literally crafted and designed to do exactly that- to peel men away from the Democratic Party?
Oh hell yes I do.
A nearly textbook case of this I could point to is what BoingBoing's comment section turned into. I honestly don't know if it was a psyop or just a case of people being really really stupid. Anyway, right after they achieved peak liberal (oh, excuse me, I called them "liberal" which they find deeply offensive, LOL, and insist on being called "leftists", by Athena, and don't you ever forget it, you shitlibs!) caricature and maintained that for a few years, it was taken behind a paywall.
Just in time for PEDOnald's second term, by the way. Very interesting.
But do I think these overly vocal and terminally online are really the Democratic Party, most importantly, the Democratic candidates actually running for office or in office?
Not even close. But I know that Faux "News" loves to go nutpicking and find quotes from the fringiest of the fringe and declare that there is a war on men or whatever.
The problem could be simply that Democrats did not attempt to connect with young men. Kamala Harris refused to appear in Joe Rogan's podcast. From https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/democrats-dip-manosphere-search-key-young-male-vote-rcna243890
One place that young male voters found a sense of community and culture, Democrats say, is in the loose collection of podcasts often dubbed the “manosphere.”
These podcasts — hosted by comedians such as Joe Rogan, Theo Von, Tim Dillon and Andrew Schulz — often make "you feel like you’re not alone,” Litman said.
“It’s funny, often very funny. It’s a little subversive or often very subversive. It feels intimate. You get to know the hosts over the course of hours and hours of conversation: their lives and their, their personalities and their quirks, and I think that is really special. Like, the parasocial relationship can be very powerful,” she added.