The Left Has Destroyed Our Emotional Relationships
Postmodern feminism has reached a dead end. Since Judith Butler led feminists to their demise, diluting what it means to be a woman and making it so even any man can be one, feminism has been mired in constant contradiction. This has all unfolded in an era of singular thought and cancellation, where the few feminists who remained loyal to late-20th-century ideas and critiqued queer theories have been excluded from the debate or even branded as misogynists. Thus, traditional feminism, possessed by the demons of the woke Left, has been left with only one outlet—hatred of men.
The first step in this process began years ago with the relentless propaganda pushing the construction of so-called new masculinities. Wokism is a theory entirely detached from reality and human nature, so the only way to enforce it is by constructing a new reality. In terms of masculinity, this construction has been a persistent effort—a steadily tended ideological seed now bearing its poisoned fruit.
To build this new masculine reality, they pitted new ‘masculinities’ against traditional masculinity, labelling the latter as patriarchal, violent, misogynistic, and backward. But their aim wasn’t to critique potential inequalities between men and women; it was to attack the very core of what defines a man and his most intimate traits. By making the exception the rule, wokists conclude that all men are potential rapists; that the traditional family is little more than a nest of violent vipers; and that the white, middle-class man is behind all the world’s ills. It’s as if they’ve forgotten Henry Kissinger’s quip: “Nobody will ever win the battle of the sexes. There is too much fraternising with the enemy.”
In these new masculinities, the new man must shed all the traits that have always defined manhood: he must renounce strength and competitiveness, embrace feminism, avoid homophobia, overplay his emotional side, feminise his outward appearance, denounce historical patriarchy, prioritise women’s needs in relationships to the point of self-erasure, and maintain a constant deference to women as penance for the supposed sins of his male forebears.
The fallout of this experiment is terrifying. What postmodern feminists have created isn’t a man, but a man stripped of humanity: without identity, weak, insecure, shirking all commitment, distrustful of all women, fighting for nothing, justifying his flaws with grandiose sentimental speeches, living under the shadow of suspicion for misogynistic attitudes, in a perpetual state of submission to the dictates of cancellation apostles. In other words, feminists have created a man whom women deeply despise—a man with whom affection, at least as C. S. Lewis understood it, is impossible: “What draws people to be friends is that they see the same truth. They share it.”
Courtesy towards women has been nullified as a sign of gender inequality; strength in virtues has vanished because new masculinities have given men an excuse to evade all responsibility; relationships with women are increasingly rare and mistrustful, limited at best to fleeting sexual gratification; and emotional or sexual voids have been filled with mountains of pornography.
And now we see the results. One of them, though still a minority, is what’s been dubbed incel culture, or involuntary celibacy. After weeks of exploring incel influencers and forums, my findings aren’t as thrilling as progressive journalists flooding the press with tales of a threat they deem greater than terrorism would have you believe. Honestly, I didn’t find a sect eager to murder women, but rather men disillusioned with their reality, men who’ve lost all trust in women, are tired of always being suspect, and soothe their identity anxiety by sharing negative feelings and experiences that show them they’re not alone.
It’s as if these men have chosen to isolate themselves from a world and society that has been hostile to them from birth, simply because they are men, and instead of fighting for what they believe, they retreat to a distant cave to live apart from any emotional connection with women. Those who veer from this stance into violent misogyny are such a tiny fraction that it’s simply impossible to establish a clear cause-and-effect pattern.
Faced with the growing exodus of young men to this isolation, woke feminists—who are also victims of the destruction of masculinity—have a chance to reflect, which they appear unwilling to seize. Instead, they prefer to chase the men who’ve retreated to that distant cave, pointing fingers and continuing to accuse them in a way that lets them keep playing the victim. This is what I mean when I say feminism has been possessed by the Left, which needs someone to hate or envy to exist—along with an excuse to play the victim.
The result, the man of new masculinity, is a social failure. A dangerous social failure. As Jordan Peterson noted, “And if you think tough men are dangerous, wait until you see what weak men are capable of.”
For some time now, major cultural debates have been artificially sparked by large-scale productions. You know the drill: in no time, a public debate is whipped up about abortion, euthanasia, racism, or violence against women. A few editorials, a couple of films, and a book, all condensed into a few weeks, are enough for progressive elites to steer the masses where they want.
The British TV show “Adolescence”—a fictional Netflix series centering around a teenage boy accused of killing one of his female classmates, and exploring the harms of social media—has been the latest focal point in a broader campaign. This campaign includes a barrage of press articles, hints in TV series, and orchestrated social media debates—all of these efforts aimed at demonising the man that is the result of feminist deconstruction, even after stripping him of identity and leaving him depressed.
“Militant” incel culture, as such, is anecdotal. What matters is that this sense of masculine depersonalisation is growing rapidly among teenagers, whether or not they join incel forums. But a new concept or word is always more effective when you want to grab attention and shape public opinion.
The final act in this farce is the insinuation that incel culture is an invitation to murder women and commit violence. I don’t know why “Adolescence” is being ‘saved’ by many conservative critics. Perhaps they think its subtext critiques the rising youth violence fuelled by a lack of values. But I fear they’re seeing the finger instead of the moon. “Adolescence” is yet another piece of a plan inherently harmful to Western values. The proof lies in how swiftly it was agreed to screen it in all British schools for children. And those pushing it are the same ones who’ve spent years trying to impose wokism in classrooms.
Some time ago, I predicted that the radicalisation of feminism would usher in an unprecedented wave of male victimhood. I also foresaw a repetitive cycle, where we swing between eras in which women claim victim status and gain rights, and others where men play the victim and reclaim their spaces. The Left thrives on this, as conflict is its oxygen. But any conservative knows that fighting against nature, against the identity of man and woman, and destroying mutually generous, complementary emotional relationships between men and women only leads to a more depersonalised, less happy society, and one more enslaved to political power.
Men are not violent by nature. They’re not potential rapists. They don’t hate women. And incels are just a handful of lads who, like many others, are frustrated with the world they’ve been given—but unlike most, have the free time and platform to air it publicly. And “Adolescence” is the dose of poison (and it won’t be the last) that the Left needs to keep this divisive tension between men and women alive, and to keep undermining the traditional family, which they fear like the devil himself. There’s a reason for that.