Why are younger men so right wing?

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Younger men are right wing because their future sucks. They are more likely to be suffering from depression, drug addiction. More likely to attempt suicide.

Their financial futures are uncertain and are unlikely to have the same standard of living as their parents. They are struggling to find jobs and buy homes.

People in those circumstances find solace in strong men and authoritarians who promise they alone can fix it. This happens throughout history and across societies.


Young men keep getting told the right is “on their side,” but the irony is that the actual policies that have kneecapped their futures the most read like a greatest‑hits list of right‑wing economics. The same movement selling them grievance content on YouTube is the one that backed the offshoring wave that wiped out millions of male‑dominated jobs, gutted unions that once guaranteed apprenticeships and middle‑class wages, and fought every attempt to raise the minimum wage in a labor market where young men are overrepresented in low‑pay work.

They’re being pulled toward a politics that tells them their struggles are caused by immigrants, women, or “wokeness,” while the real structural hits have come from decades of GOP deregulation, union‑busting, cuts to vocational training, and blocking healthcare expansion, all of which disproportionately hurt young men trying to get stable footing. The irony is brutal: the same guys who feel abandoned by the economy are gravitating toward the faction that championed the very policies that chopped away at their economic ladder.

And the kicker? The actual number of trans athletes, DEI hires, or campus culture‑war villains affecting their real‑world prospects is statistically microscopic. Meanwhile, the big‑ticket items: wages, healthcare, job training, housing, and worker protections are where the right’s policy record hits young men hardest. They’re fighting phantoms while the big material stuff that shapes their lives was and continues to be undermined by the GOP right out in broad daylight.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The ‘trans policies’ you are bleating about were in place when Trump was president before. Not a Biden thing, no matter how much the GOP wants to make Fetch happen.


What exactly is a "trans policy" anyway? I treat them the same as I do any other human being and they tend to reciprocate. What more is needed in official policy than that.


As do I.

The policies we are referring to add a nonsensical protected category of “gender identity “ which negates sex based rights for women . Hope that helps.


It didn't negate anything. That's not how anti-discrimination laws work.


Of course it did. You can’t discriminate (aka keep women’s sports limited to women) if a man’s gender identity tells him that he feels like a woman.

The Biden administration ignited controversy when it finalized the new rules last year. The regulation expanded Title IX, a 1972 law forbidding discrimination based on sex in education, to also prevent discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation



Nothing in the 2024 Title IX rule eliminates sex‑separated sports. The athletics regulations are separate, still being litigated, and schools can still set eligibility rules based on competitive fairness. The idea that adding gender identity as a protected class ‘negates’ sex‑based rights misunderstands how civil‑rights law works; protected classes coexist, they don’t cancel each other out.

If the concern is competitive advantage or scholarships, that’s a policy question for sports‑specific rules, not a reason to block protections against harassment or exclusion in classrooms, dorms, or basic participation. And the numbers matter: trans women in competitive women’s sports are statistically microscopic: a mere fraction of a fraction of a percent of athletes, and accordingly, scholarship displacement is also a statistically negligible number, approximately 0.01% of all NCAA athletes. It makes no sense to dismantle broad anti‑discrimination protections just because of 0.01% edge‑case hypotheticals. And before you say "one is too many," go look at what your political allies have done (or more accurately not done) about reforming gun laws given mass shooting after mass shooting after mass shooting. You don't get to cut to the head of the line with trans legislation given far more harmful things impacting society.

Also the locker‑room panic over trans people is a red herring. Indecent exposure, harassment, and voyeurism are already illegal regardless of gender identity. Title IX doesn’t override criminal law or school conduct codes. The rule simply says you can’t deny someone equal access solely for being transgender. That’s it. Everything else: sports fairness, safety, discipline is and has always been governed by existing, separate rules.




The rule simply says you can’t deny someone equal access solely for being transgender.


Which is why under previous administration-men started to access women spaces and women’s sport.

Stop being disingenuous.

Fortunately now there are cases before the Supreme Court which will determine whether states may enforce laws ensuring that women’s and girls’ sports remain female-only, or whether male athletes who identify as transgender must be permitted to compete on female teams.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The ‘trans policies’ you are bleating about were in place when Trump was president before. Not a Biden thing, no matter how much the GOP wants to make Fetch happen.


What exactly is a "trans policy" anyway? I treat them the same as I do any other human being and they tend to reciprocate. What more is needed in official policy than that.


As do I.

The policies we are referring to add a nonsensical protected category of “gender identity “ which negates sex based rights for women . Hope that helps.


It didn't negate anything. That's not how anti-discrimination laws work.


Of course it did. You can’t discriminate (aka keep women’s sports limited to women) if a man’s gender identity tells him that he feels like a woman.

The Biden administration ignited controversy when it finalized the new rules last year. The regulation expanded Title IX, a 1972 law forbidding discrimination based on sex in education, to also prevent discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation



Nothing in the 2024 Title IX rule eliminates sex‑separated sports. The athletics regulations are separate, still being litigated, and schools can still set eligibility rules based on competitive fairness. The idea that adding gender identity as a protected class ‘negates’ sex‑based rights misunderstands how civil‑rights law works; protected classes coexist, they don’t cancel each other out.

If the concern is competitive advantage or scholarships, that’s a policy question for sports‑specific rules, not a reason to block protections against harassment or exclusion in classrooms, dorms, or basic participation. And the numbers matter: trans women in competitive women’s sports are statistically microscopic: a mere fraction of a fraction of a percent of athletes, and accordingly, scholarship displacement is also a statistically negligible number, approximately 0.01% of all NCAA athletes. It makes no sense to dismantle broad anti‑discrimination protections just because of 0.01% edge‑case hypotheticals. And before you say "one is too many," go look at what your political allies have done (or more accurately not done) about reforming gun laws given mass shooting after mass shooting after mass shooting. You don't get to cut to the head of the line with trans legislation given far more harmful things impacting society.

Also the locker‑room panic over trans people is a red herring. Indecent exposure, harassment, and voyeurism are already illegal regardless of gender identity. Title IX doesn’t override criminal law or school conduct codes. The rule simply says you can’t deny someone equal access solely for being transgender. That’s it. Everything else: sports fairness, safety, discipline is and has always been governed by existing, separate rules.




The rule simply says you can’t deny someone equal access solely for being transgender.


Which is why under previous administration-men started to access women spaces and women’s sport.

Stop being disingenuous.

Fortunately now there are cases before the Supreme Court which will determine whether states may enforce laws ensuring that women’s and girls’ sports remain female-only, or whether male athletes who identify as transgender must be permitted to compete on female teams.



The changes would have made it illegal for a girl to ask to room in a college dorm with another real girl. Any boy could say they identify as preferring to room with a female and the girls would either have to accept it, or in the case of campuses that require living in dorms, drop out.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:

You might add to this:

17. Trump is funny (he is one of the great American comics in fact), and

18. Trump acts like a winner. Americans like this, and his response to the failed assassination attempt drove this point home.


Do you really think he’s funny? This is a serious question. Like his “Merry Christmas to all the losers” thing is mildly amusing but it’s his only bit as far as I can see.
Anonymous
My beyond left-wing young adult DD told me, in secret, that she is appalled by parents having their young kids change gender. I was glad she expressed her opinion, but why does she have to hide it from her friends?
Do you all not agree that it is messed up to allow underage children to change gender?
Anonymous
My son is a white athlete from DC attending a state school in California. His bubble of friends out there are all pretty much middle of the road conservatives. Not right wing or gung ho. Just pragmatic call it like they see it.

This should make all of you feel safe.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The ‘trans policies’ you are bleating about were in place when Trump was president before. Not a Biden thing, no matter how much the GOP wants to make Fetch happen.


Irrelevant.

Everyone knows that the Democrats obstructed Trump at every turn in his first administration.

Furthermore you can’t seriously be claim that republicans are responsible for pushing the mass delusion that people have “gender identity” which mis aligns to their sex into law and public policies.


he was, and is, doing illegal things. that deserves obstruction. And you may recall some of the proclaimations McConnell made about Obama during Obama's term....and his policies were not illegal. But I guess we should be outraged by tan suits and sleeveless dresses and ignore the criminality the GOP supports these days.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The ‘trans policies’ you are bleating about were in place when Trump was president before. Not a Biden thing, no matter how much the GOP wants to make Fetch happen.


What exactly is a "trans policy" anyway? I treat them the same as I do any other human being and they tend to reciprocate. What more is needed in official policy than that.


Government communication no longer uses the salutation Mr. Mrs. or Ms.
Laws regarding bathroom and locker room use.
Rules about women's sports.
stuff like that.


Stuff that affects almost no one?

Sorry, are you not referred to by your gender affirming salutation?

Defaulting to “well this affects almost no one” isn’t a winning proposition. There are many parents of daughters who were horrified by the Democrats acting like you were a bigot if you believed biological males shouldn’t be competing in women’s sports or using the women’s locker room. And instead of acknowledging the unpopularity of their position on those issues, they just doubled down and hoped that screaming you are a bigot would make people stay quiet.


Your side has done FAR WORSE by repeatedly refusing to act on gun control, despite massacre after massacre, atrocity after atrocity, which has traumatized and shattered VASTLY MORE families and inflicted VASTLY MORE damage than the fraction of a single digit percentage of trans people in athletics. And you refuse to acknowledge the fact that Americans, even Republicans overwhelmingly support common sense gun reforms and instead you just keep doubling down on guns guns guns, and "f your feelings, my gun is worth more than your child's life."

I am not going to care about you and your complaints about trans issues until you let us deal with the far bigger issues like this.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:My beyond left-wing young adult DD told me, in secret, that she is appalled by parents having their young kids change gender. I was glad she expressed her opinion, but why does she have to hide it from her friends?
Do you all not agree that it is messed up to allow underage children to change gender?


The gender change thing really affects young Women the most. It’s unsafe for men to be allowed in women’s spaces period
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The ‘trans policies’ you are bleating about were in place when Trump was president before. Not a Biden thing, no matter how much the GOP wants to make Fetch happen.


What exactly is a "trans policy" anyway? I treat them the same as I do any other human being and they tend to reciprocate. What more is needed in official policy than that.


Government communication no longer uses the salutation Mr. Mrs. or Ms.
Laws regarding bathroom and locker room use.
Rules about women's sports.
stuff like that.


Stuff that affects almost no one?

Sorry, are you not referred to by your gender affirming salutation?

Defaulting to “well this affects almost no one” isn’t a winning proposition. There are many parents of daughters who were horrified by the Democrats acting like you were a bigot if you believed biological males shouldn’t be competing in women’s sports or using the women’s locker room. And instead of acknowledging the unpopularity of their position on those issues, they just doubled down and hoped that screaming you are a bigot would make people stay quiet.


And theses are parents who bought into the right wing lies and impact. There are so few high school athletes who are trans as to be no even worth discussion and can be determined on a case by case basis by the high school/league/school district. But the right wing media machine blew the whole thing so wildly out of proportion relative to the number of people it actually impacts. But hey, it wins elections and keeps the citizenry divided, so it is all good and easy to ignore the criminality and theft taking place in plain sight.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:My beyond left-wing young adult DD told me, in secret, that she is appalled by parents having their young kids change gender. I was glad she expressed her opinion, but why does she have to hide it from her friends?
Do you all not agree that it is messed up to allow underage children to change gender?


The gender change thing really affects young Women the most. It’s unsafe for men to be allowed in women’s spaces period


and yet, there are not really cases in any meaningful numbers of young women being threatened by trans people in locker rooms, bathrooms or otherwise. But on the other hand, look at all the religious white men and billionaires who are being implicated in sex abuse, pedophilia etc. It is all projection on the "other" to distract from the true monsters.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:My beyond left-wing young adult DD told me, in secret, that she is appalled by parents having their young kids change gender. I was glad she expressed her opinion, but why does she have to hide it from her friends?
Do you all not agree that it is messed up to allow underage children to change gender?


The gender change thing really affects young Women the most. It’s unsafe for men to be allowed in women’s spaces period


Yes, by far the biggest threat to the safety of young women are trans people. Oh, wait, that might be a little off.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The ‘trans policies’ you are bleating about were in place when Trump was president before. Not a Biden thing, no matter how much the GOP wants to make Fetch happen.


What exactly is a "trans policy" anyway? I treat them the same as I do any other human being and they tend to reciprocate. What more is needed in official policy than that.


As do I.

The policies we are referring to add a nonsensical protected category of “gender identity “ which negates sex based rights for women . Hope that helps.


It didn't negate anything. That's not how anti-discrimination laws work.


Of course it did. You can’t discriminate (aka keep women’s sports limited to women) if a man’s gender identity tells him that he feels like a woman.

The Biden administration ignited controversy when it finalized the new rules last year. The regulation expanded Title IX, a 1972 law forbidding discrimination based on sex in education, to also prevent discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation



Nothing in the 2024 Title IX rule eliminates sex‑separated sports. The athletics regulations are separate, still being litigated, and schools can still set eligibility rules based on competitive fairness. The idea that adding gender identity as a protected class ‘negates’ sex‑based rights misunderstands how civil‑rights law works; protected classes coexist, they don’t cancel each other out.

If the concern is competitive advantage or scholarships, that’s a policy question for sports‑specific rules, not a reason to block protections against harassment or exclusion in classrooms, dorms, or basic participation. And the numbers matter: trans women in competitive women’s sports are statistically microscopic: a mere fraction of a fraction of a percent of athletes, and accordingly, scholarship displacement is also a statistically negligible number, approximately 0.01% of all NCAA athletes. It makes no sense to dismantle broad anti‑discrimination protections just because of 0.01% edge‑case hypotheticals. And before you say "one is too many," go look at what your political allies have done (or more accurately not done) about reforming gun laws given mass shooting after mass shooting after mass shooting. You don't get to cut to the head of the line with trans legislation given far more harmful things impacting society.

Also the locker‑room panic over trans people is a red herring. Indecent exposure, harassment, and voyeurism are already illegal regardless of gender identity. Title IX doesn’t override criminal law or school conduct codes. The rule simply says you can’t deny someone equal access solely for being transgender. That’s it. Everything else: sports fairness, safety, discipline is and has always been governed by existing, separate rules.




The rule simply says you can’t deny someone equal access solely for being transgender.


Which is why under previous administration-men started to access women spaces and women’s sport.

Stop being disingenuous.

Fortunately now there are cases before the Supreme Court which will determine whether states may enforce laws ensuring that women’s and girls’ sports remain female-only, or whether male athletes who identify as transgender must be permitted to compete on female teams.



The changes would have made it illegal for a girl to ask to room in a college dorm with another real girl. Any boy could say they identify as preferring to room with a female and the girls would either have to accept it, or in the case of campuses that require living in dorms, drop out.


Stop spreading falsehoods, propaganda and obvious disinformation. There is NO evidence in the rule text or in any legal analysis that the 2024 Title IX update required colleges to assign transgender students as dorm roommates against anyone’s wishes. The rule dealt with discrimination and harassment, not roommate matching. And regardless of this, the entire rule has since been struck down nationwide. Your hysterical "forced dorm roommate" claim is not and was not ever supported by the facts.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

You might add to this:

17. Trump is funny (he is one of the great American comics in fact), and

18. Trump acts like a winner. Americans like this, and his response to the failed assassination attempt drove this point home.


Do you really think he’s funny? This is a serious question. Like his “Merry Christmas to all the losers” thing is mildly amusing but it’s his only bit as far as I can see.


I think he is hilarious. His sense of comedic timing is incredible.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:My beyond left-wing young adult DD told me, in secret, that she is appalled by parents having their young kids change gender. I was glad she expressed her opinion, but why does she have to hide it from her friends?
Do you all not agree that it is messed up to allow underage children to change gender?


The gender change thing really affects young Women the most. It’s unsafe for men to be allowed in women’s spaces period


Yes, by far the biggest threat to the safety of young women are trans people. Oh, wait, that might be a little off.


Why are you minimizing women's concern about this?
Forum Index » Political Discussion
Go to: